We Speak for the Kids

Prior to the court date, DHS had sent in an application and recommendation for Ava’s Bio-Mom to be accepted in to a sober-living facility.  Although we were not pleased with the requirements of the facility, mainly that the mother must have the child in her custody and care the day of the move, and that the stay at the facility can be no longer than 4-months, DHS was well aware of these conditions, and failed to modify the visitation schedule to appropriately plan for reunification. Knowing that reunification would have to occur immediately upon acceptance into the sober living facility, we believed that DHS should have began developing a transition plan for Bio-Mom and Ava, to ensure that when the move-in date occurred, reunification would have a greater chance for success.

A transition plan typically occurs when reunification is the goal, and it appears likely to happen in the near future.  The plan typically increases the responsibility of the bio-family during visits, increases the frequency of visits, as well as decreases the supervision provided by the Foster family or DHS.  Increasing bio-parent responsibility may include requiring the bio-family to start providing diapers, food, and other basics for visits, as opposed to relying on DHS and the Foster Parents. Most transition plans also work up to more frequent visits, unsupervised visits, and possibly even overnight visits.  In the weeks prior to reunification, the goal is to have the child with the bio-family more often than not.  It is basically a test run to make sure everyone is as prepared as possible for reunification and to ensure a smooth transition.

 It is basically a test run to make sure everyone is as prepared as possible for reunification and to ensure a smooth transition.

None of this happened for Ava and her Mom.  Instead, DHS submitted her application to the facility, knowing that when they were admitted, they would be reunified immediately, but failed to develop a transition plan or make adjustments to the visitation schedule.  The plan, or lack there of, that DHS was administering, was for Bio-Mom to have 3-visits a week, all highly supervised, totaling 11hrs/week of visitation time. Then, upon acceptance into the sober living facility, DHS and the facility will require Bio-Mom to have 24/7 responsibility for her child, who, since birth, she has not raised. It seemed ridiculous to us, and given bio-mom’s history of struggling with stressful situations, we believed it was a recipe for failure.

As advocates for our foster children, and all children in the care of DHS, we felt the need to voice our opinion about how we felt that this was not an appropriate transition and would increase the likelihood of reunification ending in failure. Although we had previously voiced this opinion to DHS, the Case Worker (CW), our Certifier, our child’s lawyer, the visitation supervisor, and even the bio-family, we felt like our concerns were not being acknowledged by DHS.  Our last option, as we saw it, was to make a statement to the courts, for the record. This last ditch effort would at least let our concerns be documented and heard by the judge. It was a terrifying prospect.

This last ditch effort would at least let our concerns be documented and heard by the judge. It was a terrifying prospect.

The already pre-determined court date happened to be scheduled for the day prior to reunification.  The wheels for reunification were already in motion.  As we were told multiple times by the CW, “all legal parties have agreed” to the reunification…and no, Foster Parents are not considered a legal party, and are not consulted for their opinion.  Foster Parents are basically glorified baby-sitters in the eyes of the CWs, or at least that is how it feels some times. So at 9:15am we showed up to court, statement in hand, to have our concerns documented, a full 23-hrs prior to Ava’s scheduled reunification.

We had spent the week prior (The Week From Hell), drafting a statement. We were angry, we were scared, we were sad, we were mad, but most of all, we were frustrated.  The statement, (which can be read in its entirety HERE) was long, a full two pages.  Although I am pretty comfortable with public speaking engagements regarding my profession, in my personal life, I am very non-confrontational. I do not like to “call people out” for not doing their job, or create friction between individuals if it can be avoided.  As difficult as it was for me to read the statement in court, I was driven by the need to do all in my power to advocate for these children. I waited patiently for my turn to give my statement.

I waited patiently for my turn to give my statement.

Wait, that is a lie. I waited trembling and shaking, palms sweaty, mouth dry, heart racing, and feeling like I was going to be sick the moment I opened my mouth.  Some of the tension was relieved prior to court beginning.  We had reached out to the bio-parents to let them know that we were going to read a prepared statement that was advocating for their child and railing against DHS and its inability to support them. The other event that relieved a bit of the tension was the CW showing up late, forgetting the case file, and generally just being disorganized.

When asked by the judge if the foster parents had anything they would like to say, I stood up and read the statement.  The statement was long, but it felt like an eternity as I read every word on the page. The judge was a no-nonsense type of guy, one who asks very direct questions and expects very direct answers. As I read the statement, I could feel that it was a little long winded for him.  When I finished the statement, he said “Thank you for that, there is a lot of very good information in there”.  He then swiveled in his chair to directly face the CW, and began asking very pointed questions regarding why the CW had not been doing her job to support this family and this child.

The final decision by the judge was to allow reunification to occur the following morning… on paper.

This would allow for the bio-mom to move into the home, but the judge stated that DHS needs to come up with a legitimate transition plan.  All legal parties, as well as the foster parents and the bio-parents were ordered to go out in the hallway and come up with a transition plan that everyone would be comfortable with, and would increase the chance of a successful reunification.  The plan relied heavily on the bio-mom receiving support from us during the first few weeks, but we are happy to support her and our child, if it increases the probability for success.

I am fairly confident that this particular CW will never place kids on her caseload in our home again.  It is unfortunate that we were put in the position where we had to make a statement against DHS and a CW in court, but as foster parents, our main priority is caring for the children. If DHS is not going to do their job, we will do all we can to hold them accountable and advocate for the children. If advocating for kids ends up hurting a CW’s feelings when call them out in court, then so be it.  These children deserve better.

If DHS is not going to do their job, we will do all we can to hold them accountable and advocate for the children.

For the record, as stressed, nervous and sick as I felt prior to and during court, I did not throw up that day. Following my statement in court, the bio-parents, and bio-grandparents, as well as the attorney’s for our kiddo and bio-mom thanked me for making the statement.  The bio-dad even told us that we were welcome to be as involved as we want to be in Ava’s life going forward, and that they consider us part of their extended family now because of the way we cared for their child.  After court we went home and took Ava to the park with our niece and had a beautiful day.