Showing posts with label permanency. Show all posts
Showing posts with label permanency. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 09, 2010
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Permanency Or Independent Living? It's NOT an Either/Or Situation
As a former foster child, I've been saying this for years:
"The child welfare system tends to focus on where to place youth.
"The child welfare system tends to focus on where to place youth.
"But regardless of placement, whether a young person ends up being adopted, reuniting with biological parents, being connected with family members or staying in a group home, foster home, institution or juvenile facility...
"They still need to have the tools necessary to build relationships and to ensure their long-term physical and emotional survival."
Glad that the experts are catching up!
Wednesday, June 04, 2008
A model for Youth-Centered Permanency
Lisa, Kerri and Allyson at Colorado conferenceOne of my favorite workshops during the Many Voices, One Vision conference was "Youth-Centered Permanency," led by Allyson Coldwell and Kerri Klein.
Allyson and Kerri tackle "cold cases" in which a child has been languishing in foster care for years.
This young person is usually between the ages of 12- 16 years old.
They put on their detective hats and work with that young person to chart all the caring adults in his or her life. The list they generate from his or her answers might include neighbors, distant relatives, teachers, coaches, staff members from previous group homes or residential facilities, etc.
Then, Allyson and Kerri contact those adults, with the young person's permission, and invite them to participate with the young person in a meeting. During this somewhat lengthy process, they stay in touch with the young person because they know that this process can stir up painful emotions.
During the actual meeting, each adult in attendance has the opportunity to make a firm commitment to the young person. This commitment might range from holiday cards, to weekly phone calls, to monthly visits - or even adoption!
I wish this had been done for me during my time in foster care.
Every time I changed placements, I lost contact with every caring adult that I had built a relationship with... Those adults were either forbidden to contact me, discouraged from contacting me, or just didn't have any contact information to stay in touch with me afterwards!
Allyson and Kerri's method struck me as creative, innovative and having powerful potential to increase the circle of support in a young person's life.
Friday, March 21, 2008
Disrupted adoption from the adoptee's point of view
Currently in the United States, adoptions are being promoted as the “cure” for foster care, and a panacea to all permanency issues. And yet, across America, there are a growing number of adoptions that dissolve after finalization.
The highest disruption rate is for children who are adopted as teenagers.
Also at higher risk are:
- Children who are separated from their siblings.
- Children who have been sexually abused
- Children who have been adopted before and that adoption failed
The term ‘disrupted adoption’ sounds like it was coined in order to minimize the emotional impact. It brings to mind phrases like: “The television program was disrupted by a commercial break,” or a teacher saying to her class, “Be quiet. I will tolerate no more disruptions!”
Perhaps it’s a subtle way to assign blame to the child. Could it be a lingering accusation of insubordination? Does it imply that the child is an intruder, disrupting the customary order of their adoptive parents’ household?
A friend of mine who was adopted from foster care was recently reading a blog entry from an adoptive parent whose complaint was: “I guess we just thought that we would love him sooner. He is obviously crazy about us, but I just find myself coming home from a long day at work, and wishing he would calm down.”
My friend looked up from the article and commented, “It sounds like they were looking for a puppy.”
Prelude to a Loss
A series of stages have been identified by the University of South Maine that often lead to adoption disruption. First, the adoptive parents become frustrated with the child’s behavior and begin questioning their choice to adopt. They start complaining about the child to other people.
Hopefully the adoptive parents have surrounded themselves with a support group to both comfort and challenge them regarding their parenting skills. It is normal to feel overwhelmed after an adoption, just as many parents go through an adjustment after their child’s birth.
When I became a stepmother, I remember that the transition to ‘instant parent’ wasn’t easy. It took time to define the roles in our relationship, to build trust and to set limits. I knew that it wouldn’t always be easy, and it wasn’t. But I also knew that when I chose to marry my husband, I was making a lifelong commitment to his daughters as well.
Adoption needs to be perceived as a serious commitment. A child is not a defective product. A child cannot be taken out on a trial run. You can’t have buyers’ remorse, and then take that child back for a refund.
And yet, prior to adoption disruption, adoptive parents allow themselves to fantasize about what it would be like if this child were no longer a part of their family. Finally, they issue an ultimatum to the child.
The Aftermath
Most articles about disrupted adoption focus primarily on the emotions of the adoptive parent. But what does it feel like to be the child, undergoing that level of rejection?
For children and teenagers who have experienced disrupted adoptions, this experience impacts both their personal identity and long-term survival.
They often wind up in limbo:
1.) Their birth certificate has been permanently changed. It is now inaccurate, because it has been rewritten to state that their adoptive mother gave birth to them. They aren’t allowed to have a copy of their original birth certificate without approval from both parents. In fact, they aren’t allowed to have personal documents, such as their (doctored) birth certificate, until they are 21 years old.
2.) Not only can they not rely on their former adoptive families, they are no longer legally related to their biological siblings. An adoptee explained it to me like this: “We are brother and sister, but on paper, it looks like we aren’t even related. I can’t even be his next of kin.”
3.) As they transition to adulthood, they are often unsure of how to fill out their taxes or the federal student aid application for school. They are asked to “prove” that their adoption was legally disrupted. If their adoptive parents have simply abandoned them, as happens all too often with teenagers, they can’t.
These transitioning young adults are unable to receive benefits such as ETV funds, because they were adopted and the assumption is that their adoptive parents – who have been receiving adoption subsidies for their care – are financially providing for them.
This is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the "limbo" that adoptees whose adoption has been "disrupted" can experience... Think about international adoptees who wind up in the United States foster care system.
Recommended Policy Changes
Adoption agencies should be held to the standard of full disclosure. Research has demonstrated that parents who understand beforehand about a child’s previous physical or sexual abuse are less likely to disrupt the adoption. Sometimes, such as in the case of international adoption, there might not be a lot of information available. However, inasmuch as it is possible for an agency to fully inform adoptive parents about a child’s background, they should do so.
Screen adoptive parents’ motivations and expectations. Is the adoption based primarily on the needs of the child or the adoptive parent? Many people adopt due to their inability to conceive. Sometimes disruptions occur because parents feel entitled to some wonder-child that they’ve been imagining and the child doesn’t meet those expectations.
Training for adoptive parents should include the “what if” scenarios. What if you adopt a child, and discover that child has been sexually abused? Adoptive parents should be prepared in advance, and encouraged to create a financial and emotion safety net in the event that a child might need residential care.
Facilitate an atmosphere of trust, by allowing the child contact with loved ones. An adoptee shared with me her experiences on the day of her “Goodbye Visits” prior to her adoption.
During the course of one day, she had to say goodbye to her birth family, the foster family with whom she had been staying for years and her brother. That day was the most horrific day of her life.
Three months later, her new adoptive parents were upset that she didn’t want to call them “Mom” and “Dad.”
The term Reactive Attachment Disorder makes me nervous because I believe it is a diagnosis that is given too quickly. This label makes it easier to underestimate the resilience of an adoptee and to magnify their problems. It makes it easier to blame the adoptee when things go wrong.
Imagine if someone came to you and said, “You are going to enter the witness protection program. You need to go and say goodbye to all the people that you have ever loved. You can no longer have any contact with them. It is for their safety.”
In a witness protection scenario, national security might be at stake. But whose needs are being met when an adopted child is denied contact with loved ones from their past?
When I asked my friend why her adoption meant that she was denied contact with every person that she had ever loved, her explanation was, “Adoptive parents are insecure, especially with older kids. That’s why the government allows them to cut all ties.”
I believe that if her former foster family was safe enough to place her with during the interim, she should have been allowed to maintain contact with them. If she was allowed sibling visits prior to the adoption, they should have been continued afterwards as well.
I would like to invite readers to weigh in on this issue…
The highest disruption rate is for children who are adopted as teenagers.
Also at higher risk are:
- Children who are separated from their siblings.
- Children who have been sexually abused
- Children who have been adopted before and that adoption failed
The term ‘disrupted adoption’ sounds like it was coined in order to minimize the emotional impact. It brings to mind phrases like: “The television program was disrupted by a commercial break,” or a teacher saying to her class, “Be quiet. I will tolerate no more disruptions!”
Perhaps it’s a subtle way to assign blame to the child. Could it be a lingering accusation of insubordination? Does it imply that the child is an intruder, disrupting the customary order of their adoptive parents’ household?
A friend of mine who was adopted from foster care was recently reading a blog entry from an adoptive parent whose complaint was: “I guess we just thought that we would love him sooner. He is obviously crazy about us, but I just find myself coming home from a long day at work, and wishing he would calm down.”
My friend looked up from the article and commented, “It sounds like they were looking for a puppy.”
Prelude to a Loss
A series of stages have been identified by the University of South Maine that often lead to adoption disruption. First, the adoptive parents become frustrated with the child’s behavior and begin questioning their choice to adopt. They start complaining about the child to other people.
Hopefully the adoptive parents have surrounded themselves with a support group to both comfort and challenge them regarding their parenting skills. It is normal to feel overwhelmed after an adoption, just as many parents go through an adjustment after their child’s birth.
When I became a stepmother, I remember that the transition to ‘instant parent’ wasn’t easy. It took time to define the roles in our relationship, to build trust and to set limits. I knew that it wouldn’t always be easy, and it wasn’t. But I also knew that when I chose to marry my husband, I was making a lifelong commitment to his daughters as well.
Adoption needs to be perceived as a serious commitment. A child is not a defective product. A child cannot be taken out on a trial run. You can’t have buyers’ remorse, and then take that child back for a refund.
And yet, prior to adoption disruption, adoptive parents allow themselves to fantasize about what it would be like if this child were no longer a part of their family. Finally, they issue an ultimatum to the child.
The Aftermath
Most articles about disrupted adoption focus primarily on the emotions of the adoptive parent. But what does it feel like to be the child, undergoing that level of rejection?
For children and teenagers who have experienced disrupted adoptions, this experience impacts both their personal identity and long-term survival.
They often wind up in limbo:
1.) Their birth certificate has been permanently changed. It is now inaccurate, because it has been rewritten to state that their adoptive mother gave birth to them. They aren’t allowed to have a copy of their original birth certificate without approval from both parents. In fact, they aren’t allowed to have personal documents, such as their (doctored) birth certificate, until they are 21 years old.
2.) Not only can they not rely on their former adoptive families, they are no longer legally related to their biological siblings. An adoptee explained it to me like this: “We are brother and sister, but on paper, it looks like we aren’t even related. I can’t even be his next of kin.”
3.) As they transition to adulthood, they are often unsure of how to fill out their taxes or the federal student aid application for school. They are asked to “prove” that their adoption was legally disrupted. If their adoptive parents have simply abandoned them, as happens all too often with teenagers, they can’t.
These transitioning young adults are unable to receive benefits such as ETV funds, because they were adopted and the assumption is that their adoptive parents – who have been receiving adoption subsidies for their care – are financially providing for them.
This is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the "limbo" that adoptees whose adoption has been "disrupted" can experience... Think about international adoptees who wind up in the United States foster care system.
Recommended Policy Changes
Adoption agencies should be held to the standard of full disclosure. Research has demonstrated that parents who understand beforehand about a child’s previous physical or sexual abuse are less likely to disrupt the adoption. Sometimes, such as in the case of international adoption, there might not be a lot of information available. However, inasmuch as it is possible for an agency to fully inform adoptive parents about a child’s background, they should do so.
Screen adoptive parents’ motivations and expectations. Is the adoption based primarily on the needs of the child or the adoptive parent? Many people adopt due to their inability to conceive. Sometimes disruptions occur because parents feel entitled to some wonder-child that they’ve been imagining and the child doesn’t meet those expectations.
Training for adoptive parents should include the “what if” scenarios. What if you adopt a child, and discover that child has been sexually abused? Adoptive parents should be prepared in advance, and encouraged to create a financial and emotion safety net in the event that a child might need residential care.
Facilitate an atmosphere of trust, by allowing the child contact with loved ones. An adoptee shared with me her experiences on the day of her “Goodbye Visits” prior to her adoption.
During the course of one day, she had to say goodbye to her birth family, the foster family with whom she had been staying for years and her brother. That day was the most horrific day of her life.
Three months later, her new adoptive parents were upset that she didn’t want to call them “Mom” and “Dad.”
The term Reactive Attachment Disorder makes me nervous because I believe it is a diagnosis that is given too quickly. This label makes it easier to underestimate the resilience of an adoptee and to magnify their problems. It makes it easier to blame the adoptee when things go wrong.
Imagine if someone came to you and said, “You are going to enter the witness protection program. You need to go and say goodbye to all the people that you have ever loved. You can no longer have any contact with them. It is for their safety.”
In a witness protection scenario, national security might be at stake. But whose needs are being met when an adopted child is denied contact with loved ones from their past?
When I asked my friend why her adoption meant that she was denied contact with every person that she had ever loved, her explanation was, “Adoptive parents are insecure, especially with older kids. That’s why the government allows them to cut all ties.”
I believe that if her former foster family was safe enough to place her with during the interim, she should have been allowed to maintain contact with them. If she was allowed sibling visits prior to the adoption, they should have been continued afterwards as well.
I would like to invite readers to weigh in on this issue…
Wednesday, February 13, 2008
Who has the authority to define "permanency?"
How the System Defines Permanency
A recent round table of experts, convened by Casey Family Services and the Annie E. Casey Foundation, defined permanency as:
“Having an enduring family relationship that:
- is safe and meant to last a lifetime
- offers the legal rights and social status of full family membership
- provides for all levels of a young person’s development
- assures lifelong connections to extended family, siblings, other significant adults, family history and traditions, race and ethnicity, culture, religion and language.”
These are lofty goals. It’s almost as if a group of people who emerged from a “normal” family looked at everything that they personally had, and said, “Yes, we want foster care youth to have that.” So, they set that as the standard, after taking upon themselves the responsibility to define what that standard is…
Is it realistic? Is it attainable? I don’t know. As a former foster care youth, I found my first “family” in my peers while living in a college dorm. But I did not have the legal rights of full family membership until I was married in 2001.
How Youth Define Permanency
It's important to note that young people in foster care define permanency very differently. When the Urban Institute and the California Youth Connection facilitated focus groups of foster youth to ask them about this issue:
- Some youth referred to permanency as a physical or concrete entity. They said things like: “Staying in one place” and “Not having to move” and “A place to stay until you age out.”
- Other young people said, “No, it’s more than a place to live. It’s a feeling of connection.” They defined permanency as an emotional commitment from other people.
One young man described the concept of permanency as being like a permanent marker; he said, “If you draw on the paper, that mark ain’t going nowhere. The paper may go somewhere or it could be picked up, but the mark ain’t going nowhere.”
That is a great visual. Think about the people who have made an indelible mark upon your life. Not all of them were connected to you by blood, birth or legal contract.
Whose Permanency Is It, Anyway?
Now, I am going to suggest something radical here… I believe that the “experts” and the “professionals” should allow the input of foster care youth and alumni to influence how they measure success in the area of permanency.
What do youth say about adoption, guardianship, reunification with their biological family, independent living programs and aging out of foster care?
During a youth panel at the 2006 Casey It's My Life conference:
1.) Young people differentiated between biological or legal family and chosen family
2.) Youth said that they needed an entire network of connections, and not just one person
3.) Young people didn't want to be viewed as a "failure" if they aged out of the system without being adopted
4.) Teenagers in foster care expressed their need for independence and independent living skills
There Is No “One-Size-Fits-All” Approach To Foster Care
The experiences of young people differ according to the situation. Some find happiness through reuniting with their biological families. Others report being taken advantage of by ‘predatory parents.’
Here are some legitimate fears that young people in foster care express:
1. “Do you just want to close my case, or am I really safe now?” Many young people fear becoming a ‘closed case.’ The rate of re-entry into the foster care system after an initial attempt at reunification is high.
2. “Aren’t I too old for adoption?” Teenagers in United States foster care report that they have learned from past experience that most foster parents are not eager to take teenagers into their homes. They also report their fears that, by being adopted, they might lose access to independent living classes, college tuition assistance and medical insurance.
3. “Why should I take the risk of adoption by a stranger?” One of the horrors of foster care is its unpredictability. Teenagers who have grown up in the system often know what to expect from independent living programs. They anticipate having some power and control over their personal living situation.
Young people interviewed by the Urban Institute said that when they were placed in a group home or foster home, they had opportunities to leave if they did not like it – but “once you are adopted, you are stuck.”
Broadening Our Definition of Permanency
We live in a pluralistic society, where the word ‘family’ can be defined in many ways. Perhaps the definition of permanency from that roundtable was more than just lofty… maybe it was limiting, too.
I would ask the experts: "Is it a nuclear family that we are trying to accomplish, and is anything less a failure? Are we engaging in partisan politics? Or are we trying to lay a foundation that will lead to lifelong emotional resiliency?"
Foster care alumni often report finding their first experience of “permanency” through friendships and mentoring relationships. A FosterClub intern from Michigan reported finding permanency through her involvement with the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, which she described as being an ‘emotional parent’ in her life.
The way I see it, the choice is simple: We can keep defining what permanency should look like for a young person and forcing it upon them. Or we can listen to the young people themselves.
Because for a researcher, this is an outcome. For a staff person, this might be a job performance issue. But for a young person in foster care, this is their life.
Sources:
Chambers, K., et al. Foster Youth’s Views of Adoption and Permanency. Urban Institute, Child Welfare Research Program, January 2008.
Research Roundtable: Convening on Youth Permanence, Sept. 12-13, 2006.
Sanchez, Reina M. Youth Perspectives on Permanency, California Youth Connection, California Permanency for Youth, 2004.
A recent round table of experts, convened by Casey Family Services and the Annie E. Casey Foundation, defined permanency as:
“Having an enduring family relationship that:
- is safe and meant to last a lifetime
- offers the legal rights and social status of full family membership
- provides for all levels of a young person’s development
- assures lifelong connections to extended family, siblings, other significant adults, family history and traditions, race and ethnicity, culture, religion and language.”
These are lofty goals. It’s almost as if a group of people who emerged from a “normal” family looked at everything that they personally had, and said, “Yes, we want foster care youth to have that.” So, they set that as the standard, after taking upon themselves the responsibility to define what that standard is…
Is it realistic? Is it attainable? I don’t know. As a former foster care youth, I found my first “family” in my peers while living in a college dorm. But I did not have the legal rights of full family membership until I was married in 2001.
How Youth Define Permanency
It's important to note that young people in foster care define permanency very differently. When the Urban Institute and the California Youth Connection facilitated focus groups of foster youth to ask them about this issue:
- Some youth referred to permanency as a physical or concrete entity. They said things like: “Staying in one place” and “Not having to move” and “A place to stay until you age out.”
- Other young people said, “No, it’s more than a place to live. It’s a feeling of connection.” They defined permanency as an emotional commitment from other people.
One young man described the concept of permanency as being like a permanent marker; he said, “If you draw on the paper, that mark ain’t going nowhere. The paper may go somewhere or it could be picked up, but the mark ain’t going nowhere.”
That is a great visual. Think about the people who have made an indelible mark upon your life. Not all of them were connected to you by blood, birth or legal contract.
Whose Permanency Is It, Anyway?
Now, I am going to suggest something radical here… I believe that the “experts” and the “professionals” should allow the input of foster care youth and alumni to influence how they measure success in the area of permanency.
What do youth say about adoption, guardianship, reunification with their biological family, independent living programs and aging out of foster care?
During a youth panel at the 2006 Casey It's My Life conference:
1.) Young people differentiated between biological or legal family and chosen family
2.) Youth said that they needed an entire network of connections, and not just one person
3.) Young people didn't want to be viewed as a "failure" if they aged out of the system without being adopted
4.) Teenagers in foster care expressed their need for independence and independent living skills
There Is No “One-Size-Fits-All” Approach To Foster Care
The experiences of young people differ according to the situation. Some find happiness through reuniting with their biological families. Others report being taken advantage of by ‘predatory parents.’
Here are some legitimate fears that young people in foster care express:
1. “Do you just want to close my case, or am I really safe now?” Many young people fear becoming a ‘closed case.’ The rate of re-entry into the foster care system after an initial attempt at reunification is high.
2. “Aren’t I too old for adoption?” Teenagers in United States foster care report that they have learned from past experience that most foster parents are not eager to take teenagers into their homes. They also report their fears that, by being adopted, they might lose access to independent living classes, college tuition assistance and medical insurance.
3. “Why should I take the risk of adoption by a stranger?” One of the horrors of foster care is its unpredictability. Teenagers who have grown up in the system often know what to expect from independent living programs. They anticipate having some power and control over their personal living situation.
Young people interviewed by the Urban Institute said that when they were placed in a group home or foster home, they had opportunities to leave if they did not like it – but “once you are adopted, you are stuck.”
Broadening Our Definition of Permanency
We live in a pluralistic society, where the word ‘family’ can be defined in many ways. Perhaps the definition of permanency from that roundtable was more than just lofty… maybe it was limiting, too.
I would ask the experts: "Is it a nuclear family that we are trying to accomplish, and is anything less a failure? Are we engaging in partisan politics? Or are we trying to lay a foundation that will lead to lifelong emotional resiliency?"
Foster care alumni often report finding their first experience of “permanency” through friendships and mentoring relationships. A FosterClub intern from Michigan reported finding permanency through her involvement with the Jim Casey Youth Opportunities Initiative, which she described as being an ‘emotional parent’ in her life.
The way I see it, the choice is simple: We can keep defining what permanency should look like for a young person and forcing it upon them. Or we can listen to the young people themselves.
Because for a researcher, this is an outcome. For a staff person, this might be a job performance issue. But for a young person in foster care, this is their life.
Sources:
Chambers, K., et al. Foster Youth’s Views of Adoption and Permanency. Urban Institute, Child Welfare Research Program, January 2008.
Research Roundtable: Convening on Youth Permanence, Sept. 12-13, 2006.
Sanchez, Reina M. Youth Perspectives on Permanency, California Youth Connection, California Permanency for Youth, 2004.
Saturday, November 04, 2006
Foster Youth Need Both Independence and Permanency
Independence and Permanency – Can Youth in Care Have Both?
Notes from It's My Life Conference 2006
*Please note: The panel was made up of very fortunate youth. If you are linked with a wonderful foster family, legalization might not constitute a big issue. Not everyone is that fortunate. It would have been interesting to also hear from non-Casey foster youth.
Ideal for youth in care to have:
1.) Lifelong family relationships
2.) Adequate preparation for adulthood
*Definition of “permanence:” remaining until the end; indestructible (a stable mind in a stable place)
*Definition of “independence:” capable of thinking or acting for one self
What is “family?”
Nebulous definition; “people who are there for you all the time”
Biological vs. “chosen” family
Some youth are never adopted or linked with a long-term foster family; some age out of residential facilities.
How important is a legal family? Adoption can provide a last name and legal rights
Supporting and establishing a "circle of support"
Who should be involved and when should it start? As soon as possible! Emphasize the importance at an early age. Search out people with whom young person feels comfortable.
Start networking and information gathering from the time that a youth enters foster care. This needs to be forethought, not an afterthought. Empower the young person and involve them in the thought process and decision-making.
Perhaps the young person isn’t ready to think about a permanent placement yet. They might have the mindset of: “Why work on permanence when I don’t even have a home?” It's a bad idea to wait until young person finds a permanent foster home because that might never happen.
Youth-in-care need an entire web of connections; not just one person. This could include a mentor, therapist, peers, fellow alumni... You can’t put all your eggs in one basket, because that person might die or move away.
Most representatives on the panel were approximately 17 years old. I really see the need for a continuum of ages (FCAA). What I have learned as a 33-year-old alumna of foster care is that permanence and independence can be tenuous and fragile:
1.) If there are no legal ties, support networks can drift apart over time (especially if you move out of state; which many people do when attending / graduating from college)
2.) You might have to re-establish a support network / safety net later on – so it’s important to build the skills to do that, not just once, but over and over again
Difficult to explain confusing relationships to people from traditional (“normal”) families… Tough questions; it can be seem unfair and painful to have to explain over and over… Uncomfortable to have to educate other people.
Measured disclosure: Foster youth and alumni often err on one side or the other; “over-share” vs. “’under-share.” If no success stories are told, negative stereotypes and stigmas will continue to exist. On the other hand, too much disclosure can make other people feel uncomfortable.
1.) For those who over-share: Consider utilizing discretion.
Realize that it is a risk whenever you share your story with other people. There are wolves and predators out there who might try to take advantage of you; they hear your story and assume you might be emotionally (and hence sexually) vulnerable.
A job interview might not be the best time to bring it up either. Try to keep a balanced, professional relationship at work, and don’t ask for special favors. At my job, I took time to prove myself before sharing that I had grown up in foster care.
2.) For those who under-share: Summon up your courage and wait for the right opportunity. Take one small step out of your comfort zone.
If the only thing that people see is negative behavior coming from foster youth and alumni, they will never have the opportunity to witness our strengths and success, and to open their minds.
Notes from It's My Life Conference 2006
*Please note: The panel was made up of very fortunate youth. If you are linked with a wonderful foster family, legalization might not constitute a big issue. Not everyone is that fortunate. It would have been interesting to also hear from non-Casey foster youth.
Ideal for youth in care to have:
1.) Lifelong family relationships
2.) Adequate preparation for adulthood
*Definition of “permanence:” remaining until the end; indestructible (a stable mind in a stable place)
*Definition of “independence:” capable of thinking or acting for one self
What is “family?”
Nebulous definition; “people who are there for you all the time”
Biological vs. “chosen” family
Some youth are never adopted or linked with a long-term foster family; some age out of residential facilities.
How important is a legal family? Adoption can provide a last name and legal rights
Supporting and establishing a "circle of support"
Who should be involved and when should it start? As soon as possible! Emphasize the importance at an early age. Search out people with whom young person feels comfortable.
Start networking and information gathering from the time that a youth enters foster care. This needs to be forethought, not an afterthought. Empower the young person and involve them in the thought process and decision-making.
Perhaps the young person isn’t ready to think about a permanent placement yet. They might have the mindset of: “Why work on permanence when I don’t even have a home?” It's a bad idea to wait until young person finds a permanent foster home because that might never happen.
Youth-in-care need an entire web of connections; not just one person. This could include a mentor, therapist, peers, fellow alumni... You can’t put all your eggs in one basket, because that person might die or move away.
Most representatives on the panel were approximately 17 years old. I really see the need for a continuum of ages (FCAA). What I have learned as a 33-year-old alumna of foster care is that permanence and independence can be tenuous and fragile:
1.) If there are no legal ties, support networks can drift apart over time (especially if you move out of state; which many people do when attending / graduating from college)
2.) You might have to re-establish a support network / safety net later on – so it’s important to build the skills to do that, not just once, but over and over again
Difficult to explain confusing relationships to people from traditional (“normal”) families… Tough questions; it can be seem unfair and painful to have to explain over and over… Uncomfortable to have to educate other people.
Measured disclosure: Foster youth and alumni often err on one side or the other; “over-share” vs. “’under-share.” If no success stories are told, negative stereotypes and stigmas will continue to exist. On the other hand, too much disclosure can make other people feel uncomfortable.
1.) For those who over-share: Consider utilizing discretion.
Realize that it is a risk whenever you share your story with other people. There are wolves and predators out there who might try to take advantage of you; they hear your story and assume you might be emotionally (and hence sexually) vulnerable.
A job interview might not be the best time to bring it up either. Try to keep a balanced, professional relationship at work, and don’t ask for special favors. At my job, I took time to prove myself before sharing that I had grown up in foster care.
2.) For those who under-share: Summon up your courage and wait for the right opportunity. Take one small step out of your comfort zone.
If the only thing that people see is negative behavior coming from foster youth and alumni, they will never have the opportunity to witness our strengths and success, and to open their minds.
Saturday, September 16, 2006
National conference focuses on permanency for older foster youth
In the United States, over 25,000 foster youth age out of care or run away each year, before being reunited with their biological parents or placed permanently with foster/adoptive families or relatives.
The 2006 National Convening on Youth Permanence focused on the challenges faced by foster youth ages 11 and older, in finding and maintaining permanent family connections.
According to 2004 federal data on youth in care:
- Almost 50% were 11 and older
- 20% were not living with families
- 58% were minorities (34% African American, 18% Hispanic, 2% Native American, 1% Asian)
- Over 20,000 would age out of foster care without establishing a permanent connection with a family member or caring adult.
The conference took place on September 13-15, 2006 in Washington, D.C. at the Renaissance Washington Hotel.
Attendees included approximately 400 participants, representing 41 states. Representatives from the Native American tribal nations and the District of Columbia were also present. These participants included legislators, attorneys, judges, researchers, child welfare commissioners, families and foster youth.
The first session, "Telling the Story" was based on youth perspectives of permanence. Panelists included foster youth and representatives from agencies such as Foster Club and Casey Family Services.
Other topics of interest were:
1.) Examining the racial disproportionality and disparities in foster care. This session was moderated by Carolyne Rodriguez, Texas State Strategy Director. Panelists (all from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services) included:
- Joyce James, Child Protective Services Asst. Commisioner
- Debra Emerson, Director of Policy and programs
- Vicky Coffee-Fletcher, Division Administrator for Family Focus
2.) Effective court and legal partnerships to achieve permanence for youth. This session was moderated by Gary Stangler. Panelists included Jennifer Rodriguez of the California Youth Connection.
Goal of this event
Before youth age out of care, there are several pathways to establishing a permanent connection.
These include:
- Reuniting a child with his / her biological family
- Giving custody to relatives
- Establishing a legal guardian
- Maintaining stability within a residential placement.
I was unable to attend this event, although I will be attending and assisting with the Casey Foundation's upcoming "It's My Life" conference in October.
A session that I personally would love to have notes from is "Teaming Strategies: Building Lifelong Family Relationships for Older Children and Youth in Residential Care."
I plan to contact the discussion moderator, Isabel Morales, and will post the information I receive from her.
The 2006 National Convening on Youth Permanence focused on the challenges faced by foster youth ages 11 and older, in finding and maintaining permanent family connections.
According to 2004 federal data on youth in care:
- Almost 50% were 11 and older
- 20% were not living with families
- 58% were minorities (34% African American, 18% Hispanic, 2% Native American, 1% Asian)
- Over 20,000 would age out of foster care without establishing a permanent connection with a family member or caring adult.
The conference took place on September 13-15, 2006 in Washington, D.C. at the Renaissance Washington Hotel.
Attendees included approximately 400 participants, representing 41 states. Representatives from the Native American tribal nations and the District of Columbia were also present. These participants included legislators, attorneys, judges, researchers, child welfare commissioners, families and foster youth.
The first session, "Telling the Story" was based on youth perspectives of permanence. Panelists included foster youth and representatives from agencies such as Foster Club and Casey Family Services.
Other topics of interest were:
1.) Examining the racial disproportionality and disparities in foster care. This session was moderated by Carolyne Rodriguez, Texas State Strategy Director. Panelists (all from the Texas Department of Family and Protective Services) included:
- Joyce James, Child Protective Services Asst. Commisioner
- Debra Emerson, Director of Policy and programs
- Vicky Coffee-Fletcher, Division Administrator for Family Focus
2.) Effective court and legal partnerships to achieve permanence for youth. This session was moderated by Gary Stangler. Panelists included Jennifer Rodriguez of the California Youth Connection.
Goal of this event
Before youth age out of care, there are several pathways to establishing a permanent connection.
These include:
- Reuniting a child with his / her biological family
- Giving custody to relatives
- Establishing a legal guardian
- Maintaining stability within a residential placement.
I was unable to attend this event, although I will be attending and assisting with the Casey Foundation's upcoming "It's My Life" conference in October.
A session that I personally would love to have notes from is "Teaming Strategies: Building Lifelong Family Relationships for Older Children and Youth in Residential Care."
I plan to contact the discussion moderator, Isabel Morales, and will post the information I receive from her.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)