Jackson County
Foster Parent Association

Blog


view:  full / summary

Statewide Foster Parent Lending Library

Posted by jcfpa at 03:21 PM on March 05, 2009 Comments comments (1)

The Statewide Foster Parent Lending Library is now open for your viewing. We have over 1000 books cataloged and are still in the process of cataloging the videos, DVDs and other resource material. You are welcome to take a look and see what we have to offer. All books and resource material are sent out to our patrons in a canvas bag with pre-paid return postage. The patrons for this library are our foster, relative, adoptive parents. Further announcements and access instructions will be sent directly to them in the next couple of weeks. A tutorial has been created to help everyone get acquainted with the new library.


Anyone can see what the library contains, but ONLY our foster, relative, adoptive parents are able to actually reserve items for check-out.


Our patrons will be using their provider number as their User Name.


Feel free to check out the tutorial at http://oregondhs.booksys.net/opac/oregondhs/


The Librarian is Cynthia Gallegos. You can reach her at (503) 373-7838 or email at Cynthia.R.Gallegos@state.or.us.

Your Oregon Legislators

Posted by jcfpa at 12:25 PM on February 26, 2009 Comments comments (0)

http://www.leg.state.or.us/  

Rogue Federal Credit Union Seminars

Posted by jcfpa at 01:41 PM on February 09, 2009 Comments comments (0)

One of our members forward a flyer relating to classes offered for 12-14 year olds and 15-18 year olds at Rogue Federal Credit Union regarding learning to earn, saving, goal setting, budgeting, smart shopping, understanding credit, checking account basics, credit/credit reports, etc. If you have a child that would benefit from these classes, then here's your opportunity!


Flyer

Tax Help

Posted by jcfpa at 11:46 AM on January 22, 2009 Comments comments (0)
Written by foster parent Angela Cathcart:

I was a member of the association and a foster parent in 2007.  The reason I'm writing to you, is that I recently took a tax course with H and R Block and became a licensed tax preparer.  I wanted to contact you because I learned last year that we are able to claim our foster children as dependents if certain criteria is met, I was able to amend my return last year and I got an additional $2400 from the IRS.  It's absolutely amazing!  So anyway, I wanted to get in contact with some of my friends that are foster parents, but I can't find any of their information to let them know about the benefits they can claim, and returns from the past that they can amend. I wanted to get the word out there and you can contact me if you have any questions.  I will be preparing taxes this season with H and R Block, so if you want me to prepare yours, I'm more than happy to help, and get you an amazing refund.  But if you prepare your own returns and want to save the fee, you can use me as a resource.  I'm more than happy to help in any way I can.  The economy is so hard right now, we need all the breaks we can get.  Let me know if you have any questions, and I hope you'll pass the word on to the other foster parents.  I've included my information below.  Talk with you soon,
Angela Cathcart
541-772-4980

MDT Quarterly Newsletter # 57

Posted by jcfpa at 05:41 PM on January 12, 2009 Comments comments (1)
Subject: MDT Quarterly #57

Because this is work that matters

MDT Quarterly

Winter Wonderland



 

McMinville, Oregon
December 2008

Photos taken by Becki Pehan, Clinical Services Specialist at Juliette's House.

 

 

 

 

PROMISING PRACTICES

A Brief Introduction to the Oregon Safety Model
By Stacey Ayers, Protective Services Program Manager
Children, Adults and Families, Department of Human Services

In March 2007, after extensive consultation with national experts, The Oregon Department of Human Services, Child Welfare implemented the Oregon Safety Model (OSM). This model is designed to assist caseworkers in more precisely assessing and managing safety at all stages of case management, from receiving reports of child abuse and neglect through the closing of a case. Managing safety includes the monitoring of child safety in the home, as well as in foster care and residential settings.

OSM does not change the definitions of child abuse and neglect or the responsibility of mandatory reporters. The OSM does, however, shift away from incident based assessments to more comprehensive assessments. During the child protective services (CPS) assessment the CPS worker will use interviews and observation to build on the information gathered at the time the report was made. Requirements are more stringent concerning the depth of the information, the number of required interviews and the observations documented. OSM practice creates a more expansive collection of safety related information to analyze and ultimately determine if the child is safe.

Making a determination of child safety requires the caseworker to take into account child vulnerabilities, the willingness and ability of the parent to protect the child, and all identified safety threats. The term "safety threat" is defined as family behavior, conditions or circumstances that could result in harm to a child. A critical aspect of the OSM is the acknowledgement and accommodation of the dynamic nature of families. This is most important when determining the necessary level of intrusion with a given family. Child Welfare will continue to use the least intrusive approach with families, as the OSM requires ongoing decisions about the level of, and necessity for, continuing the safety intervention which is put into place.

By highlighting just a few aspects of the Oregon Safety Model, we hope to show how the model provides clear guidance to casework staff on how to assess and address child safety consistently and constantly.

For more detailed information on the Oregon Safety Model please refer to the following Department of Human Services web page.

Back to top 

CENTER NEWS

Five Questions for Oregon's Regional Service Providers

1. What is a Regional Service Provider (RSP)?

As defined by ORS 418.782 (4), an RSP is a child abuse intervention center (CAIC) selected that receive grant funding through the Oregon Department of Justice (DOJ) Child Abuse Multidisciplinary Intervention (CAMI) program to provide training and consultation related services to Oregon professionals working in the field of child maltreatment.

2. Who are the current RSP's?

In February 2008 a "request for applications" was issued for a three year project period running July 1, 2008 through June 30, 2011. Five RSPs were selected: Mt. Emily Safe Center in LaGrande, Jackson County Children's Advocacy Center in Medford, KIDS Center in Bend, Kids' FIRST in Eugene, and CARES Northwest in Portland.

3. What services do RSP's provide?

The DOJ and the CAMI Advisory Council identified the following core services to be provided by RSPs:

Complex case consultation

Peer review for forensic interviewers and medical assessments

Forensic child interviewing training

Medical assessment training

Referral and information

Outreach

Expert witness testimony and referral

3. Who can access services from an RSP?

Anyone associated with an MDT and/or a CAIC in Oregon can access services from their designated RSP.

4. Do RSPs work together, or are services different across regions?

Although the RSPs may have tailored some services to the needs of their assigned regions, each is responsible for providing services in the 7 core areas listed above. In addition, the RSPs have signed a memo of understanding outlining how they will work together. RSPs have conference calls monthly and meet quarterly to help assure coordination of services across Oregon.

5. How can I learn more?

For more information about Oregon's 5 Regional Service Providers, including their designated regions, further descriptions of core services, and contact information, see the DOJ's CAMI website

.

Back to top 

UPCOMING TRAINING

Department of Public Safety Standards and Training (DPSST) Child Abuse Conference
Salem, OR
February 11-12, 2009
 
Clackamas County Sheriff's Office Child Abuse Summit
Portland, OR 
May 5-8, 2009

Back to top 


The Oregon Network of Child Abuse Intervention Centers wants the MDT Quarterly to help you excel in the work that you do.

Your premiere source for MDT news. 



 

 

 January 2009 Volume 57

IN THIS ISSUE:

MEDICAL NEWS 

The Complex Issue of Defining Neglect
By Leila Keltner, MD PhD

Neglect has received less attention in Oregon than physical and sexual abuse. Yet neglect is far more common and may be more harmful to children's early brain development than either sexual or physical abuse

How we define child neglect shapes our state's response to it. However, definitions of child neglect vary among states and professional disciplines--and even within disciplines. These variations are influenced by the purpose of the discipline. Legislators, researchers, and service providers responses may vary depending on the definition.

Difficulties in consistently defining child neglect have led to dissonant threads in policy, practice and research. Even the term "child neglect" has been used interchangeably with  "chronic child maltreatment." Chronic child maltreatment is often used to describe the multiple types of abuse that neglected children suffer. The "chronic" descriptor illustrates the "pattern" of abuse so frequently seen in these families.

Defining neglect has been difficult because of a lack of consensus on these questions:

  • What are the minimum requirements for caring for a child?
  • Do these minimum requirements change over time with advances in science and changes in culture? (For example, have scientific advances in brain development in infants and toddlers changed our expectation of the minimum requirement for stimulation of the infant/toddler?)
  • Does the inaction of the caregiver need to have a measurable negative impact on the child or is exposure to possible harm enough? (For example, is leaving a toddler unsupervised near a body of deep water neglect if no measurable harm occurs to the toddler?)

Definitions of physical and sexual abuse differ from neglect because neglect definitions must consider the child's developmental level. The developmental context makes it impossible to easily define what specific behaviors or inactions are always neglectful. For example, the supervision needs of a toddler are strikingly different from those of a teenager.

The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) provides national definitions that are considered minimal standards for defining physical abuse, sexual abuse and neglect. Each state must incorporate the minimum standards as defined in the Act into their statutory definitions to receive Federal funds. Child maltreatment is defined by CAPTA as:

...any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm;

The State of Oregon builds on the CAPTA definition by specifying neglect as:

Negligent treatment or maltreatment of a child, including, but not limited to, the failure to provide adequate food, clothing, shelter or medical care that is likely to endanger the health or welfare of the child.

The Oregon definition stresses several key points. Neglect is an omission in the provision of the child's care and the result can be actual or potential harm.

In the commentary "Definition an measurement of neglectiful behavior: some principles and guidelines," Murray Straus and Glanda Kaufman Kantor provide a social science definition of neglect:

Behavior by a caregiver that constitutes a failure to act in ways that are presumed by the culture of a society to be necessary to meet the developmental needs of a child and which are the responsibility of a caregiver to provide.

This professional definition defines neglectful behavior based on the omission of care without commenting on the outcome. It also notes the importance of culture and the specific developmental needs of the child.

New definitions of chronic neglect focus on the child's safety and health. Chronic neglect occurs when there is a pattern of the child's basic needs not being met. Basic needs include: nutrition, health care, clothing, nurturance, protection, sleep, education, supervision and shelter. Adequate health care is assumed to include medical, dental and mental health care, and occupational, speech and physical therapy. Direct and indirect drug exposure of children would constitute omission of supervision and protection.

In Oregon, our child protection system has not been able to effectively address the issue of chronic neglect for several reasons.  First, chronic neglect is a pattern of behavior with many individual events of neglect that never reach an activating threshold, while our system is designed to respond to single incidents which meet or exceed a threshold Second, child neglect requires long-term intervention, particularly if substance abuse, mental illness and poverty are present. Our child protection system has been organized to provide short-term intervention. Because of the chronicity of neglect, short-term intervention methods are generally not effective.

If our goal is to identify chronically neglecting families to effectively intervene, we need a feasible operational criterion. One such approach discussed by Dee Wilson, MSW, Director, Northwest Institute for Children and Families, University of Washington School of Social Work and Anthony Loman, PhD, Institute of Applied Research, St. Louis, Missouri, provides a method for identifying families by frequency of encounters with CPS. Families for whom CPS received at least three referrals in one year, four in two years, or five in three years meet the criterion for chronic neglect. The referrals need not be founded, nor be for any specific type of abuse or neglect.

A professional and operational definition of neglect would provide Oregon with a consistent approach to defining the problem and identifying chronically neglectful families that need our services. Without such a definition, progress in reduction of neglect will be difficult, if not impossible, to achieve.

Leila Keltner is the Medical Director for CARES Northwest. 

Back to top

SPECIAL FEATURE 

Community Summits Create Action Plans for Chronic Neglect
By Katharine Cahn and Jennifer Clark, Center for Improvement of Child and Family Services

Most children are in child welfare because they've been neglected by their parents. According to the Status of Children report , neglect makes up 69 percent of founded incidents of abuse or neglect.

Despite this, it is still hard to generate a sense of urgency. Problems accumulate. Concerns, when viewed as individual instances, often fail to rise to the threshold required for safety intervention.

Most parents do not start out neglecting their children. Parenting capacity erodes gradually due to pressures related to poverty, or untreated mental illness or addiction. With methamphetamine use on the rise, this problem has grown in Oregon. It's bad for children, bad for families and bad for the community.

What the community sees is a 'dirty house', but cleaning up the house or giving a child a bath won't necessarily help the real problem. Psychologists tell of the devastating cumulative damage to children who are not loved, engaged, or developmentally encouraged. By school age, such children are often shunned by others, can't manage their own affect enough to function in a classroom, and fall significantly behind academically.

Intervening in neglect takes coordinated community effort Child Welfare can't do it alone, nor should we wait till the problem rises to the level when child welfare can legally enter the family.

Sponsored by the Children's Justice Act Task Force , eleven educational action planning summits were held in Oregon counties in 2007 and 2008. The purpose of the summits was to raise community sense of urgency around child neglect, to identify best practices, and to make action plans to improve community response.

The Counties included Coos, Clackamas, Crook, Deschutes, Douglas, Jackson, Lane, Malheur, Multnomah, Umatilla, and Wasco.

Participants crafted a total of 91 plans at three levels:

  • Helping children heal and catch up developmentally.
  • Helping parents in treatment, recovery and facilitating attachment.
  • Helping communities build stronger interagency collaborations and programming.

Plans to help children include: relief nurseries; services to address the special needs of children; re-building resilience in youth.

Plans and programs to help parents include: parent mentoring; parent education/family enrichment; drug courts; transitional housing or housing; transportation to services in rural areas; increasing skill of engaging parents

Plans to strengthen community collaboration include: resource information and referral, increased training and public awareness on neglect; building volunteers for mentoring, fostering, and family support; cross-disciplinary coordination and teaming; engaging the business and faith community; developing better data to track the incidence of child neglect; improving concrete supports such as financial support, housing, transportation.

Follow up communication by the CJA and by the trainer (Child Welfare Partnership at Portland State University) shows that many plans are still active, and that the planning process raised community awareness and action across the board. Four more summits will be held in 2009, in Lincoln, Wallowa, Grant/Harney, and Josephine County.

 

Back to top

LAW ENFORCEMENTT 

The Impacts of Chronic Child Neglect on Law Enforcement
By Mike Quick, Deschutes County Sheriff's Office Detective

Sheriff's deputies, city police officers, Oregon State Police officers and the Department of Human Services (DHS) serve as the primary first responders to child neglect. Tremendous amounts of time, money and community resources are spent each year on families needing repeated intervention. Early, appropriate intervention is one of the key factors in avoiding service redundancy. However, as it is not their core function, it is difficult for law enforcement agencies to streamline processes and staff resources to focus on prevention/early intervention with families. Regardless of how many unfounded reports are received on a family, law enforcement must continue to investigate each and every one.

As a Detective for the Deschutes County Sheriff's Office, I have encountered numerous families who repeatedly engage both our department as well as other local law enforcement agencies. Several of these families are or have been involved in custody disputes where the parents are angry and engage their children in these often intense issues.

One particular case involved almost weekly engagement by some law enforcement agency. Sue and Jim were in the process of a nasty divorce and child custody battle over their daughter, Tammy.* Law enforcement had four separate allegations of abuse/neglect of Tammy that were reported separately by Sue and Jim on each other. Each one of these four allegations turned into multiple contacts by law enforcement with Sue, Jim, Tammy and the other possible witnesses. DHS, KIDS Center, Mental Health, the District Attorney's office, and the Deschutes County Multi Disciplinary Team (MDT) all spent valuable time on this case. Each allegation was taken seriously and fully investigated on its own merit.

As it turned out, none of the allegations involving Tammy were founded. Neither Sue nor Jim could be charged for lack of support for Tammy. Yet, this case used well over 100 hours of time along with ample community resources, all because Sue and Jim were trying to gain an advantage over each other in their divorce. The estimated cost just to the Deschutes County Sheriff's office alone is at least $1,500 in wages and materials. However, my greatest concern is for Tammy and how all of this fighting has affected her. Also, if any abuse does occur to Tammy in the future, I'm concerned that law enforcement may have a difficult time sorting through all the conflicting statements to really know if abuse has occurred.

In summary, it is difficult to tap limited resources repeatedly for the same families as we investigate reports concerning neglect. Our hope and desire is to give each family the proper resources during the first contact in order to prevent further problems. But when this is not possible, I am proud to say that in Deschutes County we continue to investigate every allegation in a chronic case involving a family as vigorously as we did the very first contact with that family. What is even more important is that the Deschutes County Sheriff's Office embraces a sound partnership with all MDT partners and other community agencies. All of these resources are brought together by our MDT to review cases and determine the best course of action for the family involved.

*All names have been changed for confidentiality purposes

Detective Mike Quick has worked at the Deschutes County Sheriff's Office for 20 years. Mike is a Darkness to Light

Stewards of Children facilitator (child sexual abuse prevention education). Mike instructs on Karly's Law and teaches classes on Investigative Procedures for Child Abuse.

Back to top

DISTRICT ATTORNEYS' CORNER 

Leaving Children Unattended: Criminal Charges Depend on Multiple Factors
By Megan Johnson, Washington County Senior Deputy District Attorney

The breadth of the medical definition of neglect well exceeds the bounds of the criminal justice system's capacity to address it. Prosecutors possess few tools for addressing child neglect. Our options include filing of a criminal charge, filing of a juvenile dependency petition, or seeking termination of parental rights. Principally, the criminal charges to consider for cases of child neglect (not including drug endangered children cases) are Criminal Mistreatment and Child Neglect.

If children are left alone or unattended, whether or not criminal charges can be filed is governed by ORS 163.545, Child Neglect in the Second Degree. It reads as follows: "A person having custody or control of a child under 10 years of age commits the crime of child neglect in the second degree if, with criminal negligence, the person leaves the child unattended in or at any place for such period of time as may be likely to endanger the health or welfare of such child." A determination of child neglect under the statute is based on a totality of the circumstances and is driven by the physical facts and the defendant's mental state. State v. Goff, 297 Or. 635, 639 (1984). Conviction requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt of the following:

  1. leaving the child unattended was likely to endanger her health or welfare,
  2. the risk of that harm occurring was substantial and unjustifiable, and
  3. the defendant's lack of awareness of that risk was a gross deviation from the normal standard of care. State v. Obeidi, 211 Or. App. 377, 381 ? 82 (2007) citing State v. Paragon, 195 Or. App. 265 (2004).

Leaving young children unattended in a car for 20 to 30 minutes in a high traffic parking lot with the windows halfway down (or arguably with the doors unlocked) in non-threatening weather conditions should withstand appeal upon conviction. See State v. Obeidi, supra. Leaving a seven-year-old with a nine-year-old in a filthy residence (moldy clothes, bed broken, full cat litter box, strong odor of feces throughout the house) for 45 minutes did not withstand appeal upon conviction. See State v. Paragon, supra. The court seems to be hinging importance on younger children in clear public view versus older children alone in the more private setting of a residence, even if it is highly unsanitary, and even though the children in Paragon opened the door for a stranger during the time they were left alone. Compare those facts with State v. Goff, 297 Or. 635 (1984), where an eight-year-old and a 22-month-old were left alone for five hours with access to candles and matches that were strewn about, which withstood appeal.

The trend seems to be the younger the children and the more precisely the state can point to particularities of harm that can occur (in contrast to theories or hypothesis where harm might occur), the more likely those cases will be favored by the courts. Older children, even those left in deplorable conditions, will be less likely to warrant the protection of the criminal court. It may be worthwhile for the prosecutor to consider Criminal Mistreatment charges for unsanitary conditions in the house. In the end, the decision concerning whether or not to file criminal charges against a person who left children unattended will be driven by the facts of each particular case.

Megan Johnson has been a prosecutor since 2001 and prosecuted child abuse since 2004.  Megan is the Senior Deputy District Attorney in charge of the Child Abuse Team at the Washington County District Attorney's Office. She serves as the Chair of their MDT, as a member of the CAMI Advisory Council and on the CARES Northwest Governing Board.

Back to top

 

 
"I must take issue with the term 'a mere child,' for it has been my invariable experience that the company of a mere child is infinitely preferable to that of a mere adult. "
-Fran Lebowitz
Fran Lebowitz

The MDT Quarterly eNewsletter replaces the printed publication of the same name. Subscriptions are available for free upon request to: KellyWilliams803@comcast.net

TheMDT Quarterly eNewsletter is intended for MDT members to maintain a current awareness of resources and information related to the field of child maltreatment, investigation, and response.

Comments and contributions are welcome Write to the e-mail above.


Oregon Department of Justice

| The Oregon Network of Child Abuse Intervention Centers 

Kelly Consulting
1255 NW 9th Ave. #803
Portland, OR 97209
(541) 331-0780
KellyWilliams803@comcast.net  


Meet Lula Mae Walker, Foster Parent to 300 Kids

Posted by jcfpa at 11:39 AM on December 23, 2008 Comments comments (0)

By Jacqui Goddard, the Correspondent. December 23rd, 2008 Edition.


As a child, Lula Mae Walker loved to dress up her dolls and dream about becoming a real mom some day. Now 73, she reflects on her decades of parenthood with a smile, proud of the children she and her husband brought into the world and the joy they have given her.


Her first-born, Charles, arrived in 1952, followed by sisters Florence and Denise, then a brother Dennis. After that came Katrina, Desiree, David, and Dwight. Rounding off the brood in 1968 was Twyla.


But while most people might have stopped at nine, Ms. Walker found room in her heart and her home for more, reaching out to needy youngsters on a scale few could even contemplate. Over the past 24 years, she has added to her family by adopting 11 more children and fostering at least 300 others. Then there are the grandchildren and great-grandchildren, 85 in all.


"There was never a dull moment, I'll tell you that", she admits, raising her eyes to the ceiling and chuckling fondly at the memories. "If I slowed down, I don't know what would happen to me. My life is about kids, my whole life."

Even more remarkable is that she has been a single mom since the late 1970s: Her husband died at 53. His passing was closely followed by other family adversity, including the deaths of two of her sisters. Her grief had the potential to overwhelm her, and the prospect of being alone once the last of their children grew up and left home was formidable.

"By that time I only had two kids left living with me. I had had so much tragedy and a good friend of mine said, 'Why don't you go into foster care? I think it will help you.' So I went to a meeting about it. I enjoyed it, tried all the classes, and signed up."


First to arrive were foster children Anton, 5, and Anice, 6. She felt immediately at ease with children at her feet again. "Then came a little girl from up North, a teenager who had had serious problems in her life. She was so sweet and such a special little girl. Then I got five more kids and so it went on," she recalls. "The foster people would say: 'Mrs. Walker, they have got to move on, don't fall in love with the kids.' But I fell in love with all of them."

 

Life at her modest one-story home in a black working-class neighborhood of Fort Lauderdale, Fla., has been a revolving door. Most foster children have arrived with emotional baggage - abandoned, neglected, or abused, such as two sisters who, aged just 12 and 13, each had babies, having been sexually abused by the same man. By day, Walker would show them how to care for their babies. By night, she tended to the infants to allow the girls some sleep. ?They were just babies themselves, she says.


Many children suffered from trust issues and behavioral difficulties. But not once did she consider giving up on any of them. She lost her own mother when she was 18, "so I have a sense of what it is to not have a mom around", she says. "I can relate to them, sit down and talk with them. Some kids give you problems, but we have got to reach out to them when they are hurting and find out why they do what they do."


That lesson even applied the time two foster daughters stole Walker's new car, rounded up two of her other children, and sped off on a joyride. They were found by police after a two-hour hunt. "I just thank God they were safe. They apologized, but one of them had to go to the detention center for two weeks," she says. "The other one felt really bad, but she thought I wasn't going to let her come home. She said, 'No one would want me any more' I have had so many say that to me. I said, 'Oh no, I?m not going to kick you out. I love you.' "

Walker ended up adopting her.


To officials at ChildNet, the state-appointed child services agency for Broward County where Walker lives - and where 1,000 children are currently in foster care, 200 of them awaiting adoption - she is virtually a saint.


"She's able to relate to the children, make them feel valued, loved. They are able to trust her," says ChildNet adoption specialist Monica Haynes. "She loves to cook and that's one way she connects with them". She's always having a lot of family members in her home and people from her community, her neighborhood, her church. She's always been a giving person and her kids adore her. She's a rare jewel."


Over the years, the cost of caring for so many children has run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. After Walker's husband died, her eldest son took over his plastering business, which helped to pay bills. The state assists by granting a monthly allowance - $297 per month per child to foster parents and between $400 and $500 per month for adopted children.


"When I had 15 kids all at the same time, I'd say I was spending about $1,000 a month" on groceries, she says. As her children grew up and found jobs, they have always pitched in where they could as well."


With so many to care for, there has been a never-ending list of household chores, mountains of laundry, and mass catering. Outings and vacations involved herding children on and off trains like a flock of sheep, and at birthdays, Thanksgivings, and Christmases, the compact six-bedroom house burst at the stucco seams.


"But I came from a family where the sky was the limit," says Walker, a sprightly, smartly attired woman who was one of 14 children herself. "My conscience told me that this is what my mom would have done. She loved her kids and there was nothing she wouldn't do for them. She told me, 'One day, you?ll know what it is to have kids.' I sure do."

 

As she sits in her lounge talking, grandson Tyler, 7, and granddaughter Deja, 10, watch TV in the back room. There is a wail, followed by the patter of footsteps as Tyler presents himself before us. "Deja won't let me watch television," he announces, adding: "And she hit the football on your china cabinet."


Deja is summoned, told politely but firmly that she is not to be a bully, and then dismissed, under strict instruction not to answer back. "Kids will be kids, but I think most of them have learned from me," says Walker.


Last month, 17 years after her first nine adoptions, she attended a ceremony making official her 10th and 11th, 16-year-old twins Rossana and Rossano. They first moved in with her two years ago as foster children after their mother died. Their father was never around, and they had been bounced around relatives? homes.


"They were having some behavior problems; they had been let down by their biological family members so, of course, they reacted to that in the only way they knew how, by taking a negative attitude," says Ms. Haynes of ChildNet. "But Mrs. Walker has done an excellent job of working with them and being a loving caregiver, someone they can trust and rely on. That?s really huge to these children. Now they are totally different people."


The girls - both of whom are in school, one with ambitions to be a lawyer and the other to be a mortician ? are now well mannered and engaging. "I had difficulty at first, because I just missed my family and stuff," says Rossana. "But she understands us like nobody else would."


Her sister nods. "She knows where we're coming from, she gets it. She told me every day: 'There's nothing you can hide from me, because I already know. I know what you're feeling.' She was there when we needed her and I'm going to be there for her in her time of need, too."


She adds: "I don't use the word 'luck', I use the word 'blessed'. There are kids out there who would love to be in the position we are now."

Upcoming Foster Parent Training

Posted by jcfpa at 11:30 AM on December 03, 2008 Comments comments (0)
This coming Monday, December 8th, DHS will be holding a training class. "Loss and Grief, The Child and the Caregiver". Please see the attached flyer for more information.

Training Flyer

Parent's Day Out

Posted by jcfpa at 01:57 PM on December 01, 2008 Comments comments (0)

Dear Foster Care Association Parents:

 

The Primetimers group (senior adults) at First Church of the Nazarene will be hosting a ?Parents Day Out? for the parents of our association from 11:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. on Saturday, December 20th at the church (1974 E. McAndrews in Medford).  Their purpose is to provide us with a safe and fun place to bring our foster children while we Christmas shop or run errands or just rest! 

 

Although the church has an effective childrens? ministry, it will actually be the Seniors who will be in charge of this day under the leadership of their Senior Adult Pastor, Kevin Gowland.  They truly hope this day is successful, because success will most certainly encourage them to do it again, and Pastor Kevin says they really want to!  With that in mind, a few limitations have been put into place for this first event. 

 

First, they will be hosting the first forty children who sign up (I?ll give you sign up instructions later in this e-mail).  Second, they will host children ages 3-12 and potty training is not mandatory.  Third, at this first event, they cannot accommodate children with medical or high behavior issues, and no sick children will be allowed the day of the event.  Finally, the registration process below must be followed, and no drop-ins will be allowed!

 

Because the group will be limited, we encourage you to sign up your children as soon as possible.  In any event, the registration deadline is December 10.  The registration process is actually quite simple, and will work as follows:

 

To begin your registration, send me an e-mail with the name(s) and age(s) of your children that you would like to register for the event, and make sure that you include your name and address with the e-mail.  I will take note of your registration and then forward it to the church. 

At that time, the church will send you a registration form that includes a variety of information regarding the child and your contact information.  This registration must be fully completed.  Then you must bring it to the church on the day of the event, and it will serve as your child?s entrance to the event.

 

We must emphasize that no child will be admitted on the day without a fully completed registration form.  And again, absolutely no drop-ins will be allowed because the number of children is limited to 40.

 

When the church sends you a registration form, they will send a letter with a few other simple details for the day that will make it easier for everyone.  For instance, even though some snacks will be provided, they request that you feed your child before they come, and pack your child?s favorite snacks when you bring them.

 

Finally, please respond to this letter only by e-mail.  I cannot answer phone calls regarding this event.  If you have questions, please e-mail them to me and I will respond as quickly as I can.  If I cannot answer your question, I will forward your e-mail to the church for their answer.   

 

We hope this event will be a valuable day for you, and a fun day for your child!  I?m looking forward to receiving an e-mail with your child?s information to begin the registration process!  My Email is jophil22002@yahoo.com

 

Sincerely,

 

JoAnn Phillips, Vice President JCFPA

Change is Needed

Posted by jcfpa at 06:30 PM on October 28, 2008 Comments comments (2)
There is an initiative working it?s way through a few states to professionalize foster care. The argument against the proposal seems to consist mainly of these rationale. ? I don?t want  anyone calling me a professional.. I am in Foster Care because I love the kids!?

?If you professionalize foster care, you take away the love and the caring part of it!?

But what about the caseworkers that we all partner with? They are professionals, Right??? Does that suggest that they DON?T care about the kids on their caseloads? No one would argue that. As recently as the 19th century, and into the 20th century, welfare work was thought of as a volunteer endeavor. People who placed children with caregivers did so as church ministry or as part of a charitable organization. That?s right. Caseworkers were volunteers. But as society became more and more complicated, families assumed less responsibility for caring for each other. More people needed assistance. The regulations around taking children from their birth homes were inconsistent. Someone reasoned that caseworkers needed more education and understanding of laws and the people they
served. Caseworkers became licensed and the standards for their performance were raised. There was accountability. No one in his right mind would argue that we should return to the view of social workers as ?volunteers for the public good?

The problem for foster parents, though is that foster care is changing. Becoming more complicated. Laws are passed that make it more difficult for us to get information about the children in our homes and that makes it possible for us to be accused of volitions or abuse with little or no evidence. The epidemic of Meth and alcohol use and the breakdown of traditional families has sent huge numbers of kids into the system. And we serve a different kind of child.

Foster parents now have in our homes children who previously would have been placed under professional care. And that care requires training, We have to do more supervision of the children placed with us, both to protect and nurture them and to protect the other children in our homes. We?re seeing kids stay in foster care longer. That translates to more deeply disturbed kids than before. Older children also offer different challenges. That means a lot of frustration. Add to that the huge number of kids in foster care and the decreasing number of foster homes to care for them, and you can see the problem.

Sometimes, information we really need to care for these kids is withheld or given to us after we continually
harass the case worker Decisions are made about visitations and planning without our input. WHO KNOWS THE KIDS BETTER THAN WE DO.

Foster parents need to be a part of the team? an ESTEEMED part of the team? to make decisions for these kids OUR voices need to be heard. The input of a foster parent who see the child on a daily basis would be invaluable. Yet you know as well as I do the chances of a foster parent being consulted about decisions being made for a child in their care. The same chance a snowball has in?. We foster parents are seen as minimally-trained volunteers who bring little to the table but our love and good intentions.

Yet we are being asked to care for increasingly disturbed children. Through the new ?Family-to-Family? program, we are encouraged to interact with birth families. The idea of the program is that we foster parents may soon be mentoring the birth families as well as the foster child to expedite the reunification process the state requires. Our role is getting bigger and more complicated. There are fewer and fewer of us. The average ? life-span? of a foster home is less than two years.

A Foster Parent told me, ? I treat those kids just like I treat my own.? I doubt it. Your kids probably don?t have reactive attachment disorder. They probably don?t hoard food because
they are afraid they won?t get any more. Your kids are somewhat predictable because you gave them their values and their morals. These children come to us all ready wired with their own problems. We need an expertise beyond parental wisdom to care for them. We need skills as well as love. Once we acquire those skills, we need the freedom to use them as best we can to benefit the children in our care. That means participating in the decision making process and being informed about issues related to the children, and being treated with respect from caseworkers.

What other ? volunteers? do you know who would assume such responsibility, educate themselves to do their task, endure the degradation of other professionals and--in general--put themselves, their families and their homes at risk.

What is wrong with making foster care a profession? With requiring us to educate ourselves (we already do) and to participate in judicial and administrative decisions?? Would compensating foster parents for their efforts result in their not caring for their children?? Or would the worst parents leave foster care, unwilling to be accountable under standards professionalism would require??

Would being paid increased rates and given access to insurance and other benefits demean foster parents, or would the children benefit from more satisfied, less - frustrated stable care -givers??

Many people given the training required, could become caseworkers or lawyers or counselors. BUT not many people could become Foster Parents. The truth is not many people want to become foster parents. There?s a big sacrifice involved.

We are required to have ongoing education. Required to keep records. Required to keep our homes up to certain standards. I must attend meetings. I must attend trainings, do some transport, and have a caseworker come to my home at least once a month. I am expected to understand normal child development so that I can identify a child with problems in time to get them help. I administer medications and accept the legal issues involved with that. I am subject, at any time, to investigation and removal of children from my home on the word of a
dissatisfied child or parent. And I love the children placed with me!!!

BUT I AM NOT A BABYSITTER.

I am a professional. What?s wrong with treating me as one?????

California care providers have a reason to be hopeful today!

Posted by jcfpa at 12:26 PM on October 25, 2008 Comments comments (1)
The federal district court in San Francisco has ruled that the State of California has failed to reimburse foster parents for the cost of caring for children in their care at the appropriate level and this violates federal Child Welfare Law.  A final judgment will be entered in the case on October 31 of this year. While the court declined to set a specific amount, this ruling means that California must bring foster care maintenance payments into line with federal law or risk losing hundreds of millions of federal foster care dollars.  It is expected that the State will comply with the ruling.

This ruling was brought about by Legal Advocates for Permanent Parenting (LAPP) who enlisted a team of outstanding attorneys to work on the case.  Regina Deihl, the Executive Director of LAPP expressed her gratitude to Morrison & Foerster and to the Children's Advocacy Institute for their legal work on the case. 

It is expected that this ruling, since it was brought in a federal court, will have ramifications nationwide. We will keep you updated as the case is finally resolved and through our Public Policy Committee, how it might affect your state.

Below are editorials regarding the lawsuit:

San Jose Mercury News Editorial

Editorial: California shirking its obligations to foster parents

Mercury News Editorial

Article Launched: 10/23/2008 08:00:00 PM PDT

It shouldn't take a court ruling for California to do the right thing by its 75,000 foster children and the saints who care for them. Shame on state leaders for forcing U.S. District Judge William Alsup on Wednesday to tell them what they should have known: The state's low payments to foster parents violate the federal Child Welfare Act.

Alsup should have required an immediate increase in payments. Caregivers persuasively argued that rates are 29 to 40 percent too low. Unfortunately, he just ordered the state to precisely determine the costs for feeding, clothing and generally caring for foster children, building in more delay and further harming the kids.
Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger signed a bill in 2007 providing an immediate 5 percent increase in foster care payments, but that still left the state short of where it needs to be. He and the Legislature are well aware of the consequences.
The average cost of raising a child in California is in the neighborhood of $700 a month. Foster parents receive $450 to $625 a month, depending on the age of a child. Partly because of this, the number of foster parents in California has dropped 30 percent in the past 10 years. In Santa Clara County the drop has been even worse, 48 percent, losing more than 2,000 foster parents.
When foster parents can't be found, children are sent to group homes that cost $1,400 a month per child, double the cost of foster care. And foster homes are far more desirable for a child's development.
California has a moral obligation and good fiscal reasons to fairly compensate foster parents. It should stop litigating and just write the checks.

San Francisco Chronicle Editorial

Foster families need help

Friday, October 24, 2008

A federal judge has connected the dots: One of the reasons that so few families are willing to take in foster children is that the state reimbursement rate falls well short of their actual costs.
The question is whether California will raise its monthly payments to foster parents - which now range from $446 a month for infants to $627 a month for teens - before the federal courts mandate it. U.S. District Judge William Alsup noted that these levels are insufficient to cover "food, clothing, shelter, daily supervision, school supplies" and other essentials. Not surprisingly, there has been a 50 percent reduction in the number of foster children in family homes in the last decade.
In recent years, Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and the California Legislature have taken bold steps to strengthen the state's foster-care system and to hold it accountable for the outcomes of the nearly 80,000 young people it is supposed to serve. Two of the most ardent advocates for foster youth, Sen. Darrell Steinberg, D-Sacramento, and Assemblywoman Karen Bass, D-Baldwin Vista, have recently risen to top leadership positions in their respective houses.
So while the political will is there, the dollars are decidedly tight. The state might have to consider a sliding-scale system, based on income, to more fairly compensate the families that have opened their homes and their hearts to the state's most vulnerable youth.

Associated Press

Judge orders state to review foster care payments

Wednesday, October 22, 2008

 (10-22) 23:28 PDT San Francisco, CA (AP) --
A federal judge has ordered California to recalculate the way it determines how much to reimburse foster parents for child care.
U.S. District Judge William Alsup ordered the changes Tuesday, saying the state's current payments are violating the Child Welfare Act. He noted payments have fallen to as little as 60 percent of the amount the state must cover to be eligible for federal funds.
The judge stopped short of ordering the state to increase payments. But Alsup did tell the state to systematically review the costs of providing food, clothing, transportation and other services to a child. That's the standard mandated by the federal government in order for a state to receive matching federal funds.
A spokeswoman for the state Department of Social Services says officials are evaluating the ruling and had no comment.

View Older Posts »

Rss_feed