Fit and willing relatives of foster children

DCFS is abusing it's authority and breaking the law (Adoption and safe families act, Kinship law, Children's and Young Peoples Act)by disregarding these laws which clearly state that any "fit and willing relative" should be given preference in gaining custody of a related child placed in state care.

Relatives who petition for custody are not being considered in preference of non-related foster parents. DCFS is not an adoption agency, and should follow the mandates of these laws by allowing foster children to remain in their biological homes, with extended family members, when it is safe for the child to do so.

It is ironic that I am not only a cousin to the foster child I am fighting to gain custody of, but a licensed foster care mother myself. It seems that DCFS is prejudiced against the families of foster children to the extent that they use their power to abuse the "best interest of the child" clause, and in my case resorted to lying about the status of the child, obstructing by burying paperwork for weeks, and ultimately threatening me.

I called the Governor's Office, the Oversight Committee, Senator's, Representatives, and several Watchdog groups, and am making mild progress, but it is ridiculous that families should have to go to such extremes to bring their relatives back into the biological home.

I hope public awareness will help resolve this,and I will publish my story throughout the state. Hopefully many children who would otherwise suffer displacement from their biological homes will be returned to the extended family and be able to live with familiar relatives.

Suzy. Congratulations. You broke the code.

I do not not know if Washington is part of the 9th Judicial Circuit Appeals Ct.
or not but IMMUNITY has gone by the wayside in the 9th Judicial Circuit Court
of Appeals.

CA and NV are part of 9th Circuit.

I would consult an attorney. It seems as you may have a civil rights violation
of potentially serious order. Best wishes.


Suzy wrote:

Subject: Fit and willing relatives of foster children
From: "Suzy"
Date: 12/27/2003 4:28 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id: outsupport.com

DCFS is abusing it's authority and breaking the law (Adoption and safe
families act, Kinship law, Children's and Young Peoples Act)by disregarding
these laws which clearly state that any "fit and willing relative" should be
given preference in gaining custody of a related child placed in state care.

Relatives who petition for custody are not being considered in preference of
non-related foster parents. DCFS is not an adoption agency, and should follow
the mandates of these laws by allowing foster children to remain in their
biological homes, with extended family members, when it is safe for the child
to do so.

It is ironic that I am not only a cousin to the foster child I am fighting to
gain custody of, but a licensed foster care mother myself. It seems that DCFS
is prejudiced against the families of foster children to the extent that they
use their power to abuse the "best interest of the child" clause, and in my
case resorted to lying about the status of the child, obstructing by burying
paperwork for weeks, and ultimately threatening me.

I called the Governor's Office, the Oversight Committee, Senator's,
Representatives, and several Watchdog groups, and am making mild progress,
but it is ridiculous that families should have to go to such extremes to
bring their relatives back into the biological home.

I hope public awareness will help resolve this,and I will publish my story
throughout the state. Hopefully many children who would otherwise suffer
displacement from their biological homes will be returned to the extended
family and be able to live with familiar relatives.

FWD alt adoption

Subject: fw: Fit and willing relatives to stranger foster kids
From: 8spam (Palms2pines)
Date: 12/28/2003 3:53 PM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

fern5827 writes:

snip

It is ironic that I am not only a cousin to the foster child I am fighting to
gain custody of, but a licensed foster care mother myself. It seems that DCFS
is prejudiced against the families of foster children to the extent that they
use their power to abuse the "best interest of the child" clause, and in my
case resorted to lying about the status of the child, obstructing by burying
paperwork for weeks, and ultimately threatening me.


snip

Why?

I am getting in late on this discussion and perhaps you have answered these
questions before. But, could you please state why, in your opinion, any state
office of children's services would intentionally prevent "fit and willing" bio
relatives from gaining custody of a child in state care?

Thank you.


P2P

Subject: fw: Fit and willing relatives to stranger foster kids
From: x (Eldie)
Date: 12/29/2003 12:39 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:

One reason might be that the relatives of the biological parents of a
child do not agree with the state's assesment of the parents. As such,
the relatives may violate the state's "plan" for the child by either
encouraging the child to visit with his/her parents or they might
present a different viewpoint of the parents to the child.

Actually, while they may think the state acted precipitously in taking the
child from the place she was and where she was being well cared for, they do
not disagree that mom is not a suitable parent for the child. They would,
however, surely present a different viewpoint of the parents to the child than
would the PAPs presently fostering. They know the parents, for one thing, and
could place her situation
in the best light possible. But they would not permit the child to be visited
by either of her parents at the beginning and, later, not unless an expert in
child psychology said it was appropriate or a court ordered it. They've said as
much, but to no avail. One of the reports issued on this case is larded
throughout by hearsay, stuff different workers said, not the findings of the
guardian, and all untrue. I would add that there have been many caseworkers
involved directly with this child and each moved on to a different
out-of-agency job - except one, the only one who was actually trying to effect
a unification between the child and her relatives. She, of course, was
transferred immediately away from the case.

e

"Suzy" wrote in message
lkaboutsupport.com...
DCFS is abusing it's authority and breaking the law (Adoption and safe
families act, Kinship law, Children's and Young Peoples Act)by disregarding
these laws which clearly state that any "fit and willing relative" should be
given preference in gaining custody of a related child placed in state care.

Really? "Willing" is just as had to find as "fit". And if I remember
right, ASFA states that they must make the effort, not that they are
mandated to do it. Therefore they are not breaking the law, they are
following it closely.

fern and I have had that discussion many times, and he/she/it has yet to
show us where kinship care is mandated.

Relatives who petition for custody are not being considered in preference
of non-related foster parents. DCFS is not an adoption agency, and should
follow the mandates of these laws by allowing foster children to remain in
their biological homes, with extended family members, when it is safe for
the child to do so.

Preference automatically goes to relatives, but if they are unsuitable to
care for the children in any one of a number of ways then they are not
considered. That's the way it works.

It is ironic that I am not only a cousin to the foster child I am fighting
to gain custody of, but a licensed foster care mother myself. It seems that
DCFS is prejudiced against the families of foster children to the extent
that they use their power to abuse the "best interest of the child" clause,
and in my case resorted to lying about the status of the child, obstructing
by burying paperwork for weeks, and ultimately threatening me.

Well now, that's going to depend on how you approached the problem. If you
went in with a chip on your shoulder (as I suspect you did), or are living
in another state, then I can see where you might find problems.

I called the Governor's Office, the Oversight Committee, Senator's,
Representatives, and several Watchdog groups, and am making mild progress,
but it is ridiculous that families should have to go to such extremes to
bring their relatives back into the biological home.

Oh, so you started this with an adversarial approach? What did you expect?
The state to hand over the kid without comment or concern? Just how long
have you been a foster parent? Not long is my guess, for if you had been
you would have had experience with relative placements and have seen some of
the many problems that ensue from them.

I hope public awareness will help resolve this,and I will publish my story
throughout the state. Hopefully many children who would otherwise suffer
displacement from their biological homes will be returned to the extended
family and be able to live with familiar relatives.


Public awareness is not the problem here, approach is. How you go about
making your case. Sounds to me, given the tenor of your post, that you went
in demanding things and got your hat handed to you. I would have expected
no less if I had done that when my nephew went into care in the early 90's.
Instead, I used the system as it was designed, went in requesting rather
than demanding, and they had him on a plane in less than a week. I lived 4
states away at the time, and California was more than willing to accommodate
my request because they understood the importance of family to a child. You
might give a more sedate approach a try. Better for you, better for your
cousin.

Ron

You are very much mistaken, Ron, but I can understand your sceptisism. As a matter of fact I petitioned for my cousin with proper protocol. Being a foster parent for over 10 years, and being very highly regarded in my department,I was given assistance in filing the proper paperwork and my supervisors recommended me highly to the dept. holding my cousin.

The first thing the Richland Office did was bury the paperwork, lie about my cousin's status, saying she was already in a pre-adopt situation with her aunt...proven to be not true on both accounts, and ultimately threaten to "blow me out of the water" if I dared to petition in court for her.

So yes, I did take a more militant stance in fighting for her, and the more I fought, the more resistance I met. I simply met resistance with resistance because my only alternative was to give her up, which I wasn't willing to do.

Relatives who are fit(I have already completed an approved adoption home study) and willing are always given priority to foster children in care. I am very familiar with procedure, and sit in on planning meetings each month. I do know proper protocol, and I do know corruption when I see it. So does my dept., so does every single person and organization I have contacted. In fact the area supervisor of this dept. admitted to me that there are problems which need to be addressed.

I was awarded visitation today, and told I would most likely prevail. I did not choose to "have a chip on my shoulder"...Richland put it there. I appreciate your input, however...thank you for posting.
Suzy

You are very much mistaken, Ron, but I can understand your sceptisism. As a matter of fact I petitioned for my cousin with proper protocol. Being a foster parent for over 10 years, and being very highly regarded in my department,I was given assistance in filing the proper paperwork and my supervisors recommended me highly to the dept. holding my cousin.

The first thing the Richland Office did was bury the paperwork, lie about my cousin's status, saying she was already in a pre-adopt situation with her aunt...proven to be not true on both accounts, and ultimately threaten to "blow me out of the water" if I dared to petition in court for her.

So yes, I did take a more militant stance in fighting for her, and the more I fought, the more resistance I met. I simply met resistance with resistance because my only alternative was to give her up, which I wasn't willing to do.

Relatives who are fit(I have already completed an approved adoption home study) and willing are always given priority to foster children in care. I am very familiar with procedure, and sit in on planning meetings each month. I do know proper protocol, and I do know corruption when I see it. So does my dept., so does every single person and organization I have contacted. In fact the area supervisor of this dept. admitted to me that there are problems which need to be addressed.

I was awarded visitation today, and told I would most likely prevail. I did not choose to "have a chip on my shoulder"...Richland put it there. I appreciate your input, however...thank you for posting.
Suzy

"Suzy" wrote in message
lkaboutparenting.com...
You are very much mistaken, Ron, but I can understand your sceptisism. As
a matter of fact I petitioned for my cousin with proper protocol. Being a
foster parent for over 10 years, and being very highly regarded in my
department,I was given assistance in filing the proper paperwork and my
supervisors recommended me highly to the dept. holding my cousin.

So, then just who did you **** off and why? "If" you had followed the
proper procedures then you should have not had any problems at all. Since
you did, then there is a significant part of the story that you are not
telling us.


The first thing the Richland Office did was bury the paperwork, lie about
my cousin's status, saying she was already in a pre-adopt situation with her
aunt...proven to be not true on both accounts, and ultimately threaten to
"blow me out of the water" if I dared to petition in court for her.

To what purpose? Why would they do this? Give us a reason, something we
can believe. Sorry, but your story has a distinct smell of long deceased
fish to it. What did YOU do to make this an issue?

So yes, I did take a more militant stance in fighting for her, and the
more I fought, the more resistance I met. I simply met resistance with
resistance because my only alternative was to give her up, which I wasn't
willing to do.

Militant? Sorry, you don't know the meaning of the term. But that aside,
let me ask you a question. What has butting heads with the department
gotten you? What part of the story is it that you are not telling?

Relatives who are fit(I have already completed an approved adoption home
study) and willing are always given priority to foster children in care. I
am very familiar with procedure, and sit in on planning meetings each month.
I do know proper protocol, and I do know corruption when I see it. So does
my dept., so does every single person and organization I have contacted. In
fact the area supervisor of this dept. admitted to me that there are
problems which need to be addressed.

And? Suzy dear, the posters to this news group for the most part have been
doing so for a very long time. Myself, I have been posting for more than 5
years now. And I passed the 10 years of fostering mark a long time ago. We
are not ignorant (this of course does not include fern), and we know half a
story when we see it. We ask for the "rest of the story" commonly when we
get that fishy smell in a post, as I have pointed out here.

As much as we humans dislike admitting to our mistakes, omitting them in a
post is like a neon light, and just as easy to spot. Clear up the fish
smell for us please, tell us the part of the story that you are not proud
of, that part that tells us what YOU did to bring this situation on.

I was awarded visitation today, and told I would most likely prevail. I
did not choose to "have a chip on my shoulder"...Richland put it there. I
appreciate your input, however...thank you for posting.
Suzy

Sorry dear, but you choose to walk in wearing that chip. It was a choice.
If you had not, if you had taken a different tact, your story would be
significantly different. Its these decisions that makes us adults, but
sometimes even we adults don't make the best decisions. Yours was the day
you decided to go around the rules and procedures and bull your way through,
because you were of the opinion that you had rights that you did not. You
paid that price (to a point, there is more to pay, believe me), but the sad
thing is that your cousin also had to pay it, needlessly.

Ron

Hello again, My sin in all of this is not keeping tabs on what was happening to Jessica, and allowing it to get to the point that she was placed in care. My dislike for Jessica's father and his lifestyle was the reason the family distanced itself from him, and we truly believed Jessica'a mother was taking care of her. We did not check up on her, and for that we are paying dearly, but to do so would have invited this unsavory relative into our homes, and we did not want him around our children.

The minute I heard she was in care, I petitioned for her, and my dept. tried in vain to have the jurisdiction changed to Centralia, never anticipating the problems we would encounter. I am truly who I say I am, and frankly don't care who knows my name...what I tell you can easily be verified.

My Name is Suzy Nickel, I live in Toledo, WA, I am a highly respected foster mother/foster adopt mother, and I am fighting a corrupt DCFS Office. I work for a Dept. that follows proper procedure, and I am not anti-CPS...I am against corruption however, and when a supervisor lies about a child's status, buries paper work and threatens a familt member, there is something wrong.

I am new to these forums, and I know some people go on them for entertainment, but this is my little cousin and a member of my family, and she is being adopted out to a hand picked foster mother. I want people to know what is happening. I was denied visitation because Richland is trying to "run out the clock" by keeping family away from her until the magic 18 month period is over, then they can say she's had no contact with the family for 18 months, so therefore she should go to the foster mother who is claiming "Liberty rights".

I currently have adopted children and children I have taken guardianship for from the state. I have had these children for 5 years, and they will always be part of my family. If I were not fit and willing, the state would not allow me to have them...this is why everyone is so baffled at the way Richland is behaving. There is no just cause for them to deny me custody of my own family member.

I don't know how to convince you that I am not a militant activist, it probably does sound like it because of the lengths I have had to go to, but I had no other choice. I'm sure your next question will be "if I had so little contact with her, why do I care if she is adopted to a stranger", and all I can say to that is, she has a heritage, an extended family, a right to know her responsible family members, and a right grow up among her own relatives, my children being in the same age range and having a profound family resemblance.

I do not feel that a single woman living with her parents is a preferable placement for her when her family wants to take responsibility for raising and loving her. Families should take care of their own, and lessen the burden of the state, and it is better for the child to know that she does have positive role models for her family, and that her parents are not a reflection of the entire family.

I feel that fighting for my cousin is the right thing to do, and having been on both sides of the fence, I see now what it is like for family members to get custody of children in state care. My heart goes out especially to Grandparents who are denied their own Grandchildren. My dept. allowed each family member of the little girl I adopted to petition for her...a long, long process, but they were treated with respect, and it was because they did not finish the home study, could not pass the background check, or just dropped out of the process that I was able to adopt her. They were not obstructed from petitioning. There is a huge difference here.

I have been studying case law to find out the legalities in matters such as this, and I read one that maybe you are familiar with, but I had never heard of it...Power corrupts..absolute power corrupts absolutely...absolute immunity is absolute power. I think it applies in this case...Richland should not be able to lie, threaten and delay to prevent a family from gaining custody of a state child.

When I first found out about Jessica, I called Richland and asked if I could come to their office and meet with the planning board (proper procedure) I was told yes, but they never invited me, so I continued to ask. They told me to send my home study, background sarch, and foster care license before coming, which my dept. did, and they claimed they never received it. It was sent again by fax, and again by my attorney, and still they claimed they didn't have it. They had no knowledge of dozens of recommendations coming in from different sources either. They said until they had the paperwork they didn't want me to come. This went on for weeks. Then my supervisor called the Richland supervisor to find out what was going on, and this is when she told him my cousin was living with her biological aunt, and that she had court documents to prove it. This was proved to be a lie, and their dept. admitted that there was a problem. I was then threatened that if I dared to go to court I would be blown out of the water.

This is when I became "militant". This is when I started calling the legislature, the papers, the Gov., etc. I must seem like the "Red Queen" to you, screaming "Off with their heads", and frankly that's how I feel, but I never thought it would be anything more than petitioning for transfer of jurisdiction. I am telling you the facts in this case, and I am not hiding anything or dramatizing things to further my cause...something is really wrong here, and I don't think I am wrong for holding Richland accountable for it's actions.

There is a code of ethics at DCFS, and lying, delaying, and threatening are not something that is condoned. I'm sorry if you think I'm a "nut case", but I appreciate having somewhere to vent my frustration and voice my concerns. I am heartbroken that the family let Jessica down, and that she has had to be separated from us because we didn't check on her. We had a responsibility to her, and for that I have no excuse, but I can't walk away from her without trying my best to bring her home. I am guilty of wanting to associate only with my nice relatives, and I should have checked on her especially knowing what her father was like. For that I stand convicted.

Thanks for listening...Suzy