Plant Prattles HUGE destructive lie against relatives....

On 21 May 2004 13:59:42 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

Note the vicious liar: Plant, why did you confine your post to aps?
Afraid to post where you might be challenged for your dangerous lies
that might discourage kin from trying to foster their own relatives?

Let's start with the truth, so we don't drive away any relatives that
might be asked to foster or adopt...the states want you, will go out
of their way to place with you, and will support the child with not
just a cash subsidy but with rehabilitative and remedial services of
many kinds.

Now on to the lies that The Plant, yet another of the lying pack of
Douggie's hyenas, tries to foist about kinship care. Kane

Begin Fern5827's remarks, and mine following intersperced:

You see, the way the Feds set up funding, Foster Care was one of the
few
options available for abused children.

Few?

So tell us, Tulip, what about the children returned to their parents
under state supervision?

Not only foster care, but STRANGER FOSTER CARE.

Odd, I see figures only as low as 24% and up to 50% or more, going to
relatives for foster care and adoption.

And an aside: those kinship foster caregivers are NOT separated out of
the "foster" demographic when abuse by "fosters" is counted. In other
words, some of those relatives are themselves abusive. So stranger or
kincare, children are abused by caregivers. Try not to lie so much.
Your nose is too long already.

I've also heard, first hand face to face, relatives refuse to take the
children, and also I have witnessed them, by their own mouths, refuse
to adopt those children who had nowhere else to go and insist on long
term fostercare....so they would get the higher rate of monies.

Familiar with that concept, Lavonne?

If she isn't I certainly am.

As it stands today, fewer than 27% of children supposedly abused or
neglected
are placed with kin or blood relatives.

R R R R ..... careful exiting your car. ..you'll stab someone with
that proboscis.

You recently posted something very different about LA county. And I
know you cannot provide proof of your 27% claim.

Let's look at the post and today...and compare not only the past
figures...but the trend to today......starting 6, that's 6 YEARS
AGO....

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/

"The Extent to Which Children in Foster Care Are Placed with Relatives

In 1998, approximately 2.13 million children in the United States, or
just under 3 percent, were living in some type of kinship care
arrangement. In 1997, approximately 200,000 children were in public
kinship care, well below 1 percent of all U.S. children but 29 percent
of all foster children. Available evidence suggests that public
kinship care has increased substantially during the late 1980s and
1990s (see Chapter 1).

(gee, Geranium, it wasn't as low as 27% even 6 years ago)

Three main factors have contributed to this growth. First, the number
of non-kin foster parents has not kept pace with the number of
children requiring placement, creating a greater demand for foster
caregivers. Second, child welfare agencies have developed a more
positive attitude toward the use of kin as foster parents. Today,
extended family members are usually given first priority when children
require placement. Third, a number of Federal and State court rulings
have recognized the rights of relatives to act as foster parents and
to be compensated financially for doing so. "

Notice what it says about "Today?"
(don'tcha just hate it when I do that? R R R R R R E E E E E E O O O O
O R R R ....but you just keep posting lies without checking
first.....)

That was from:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
Administration on Children, Youth and Families
Children's Bureau

June 2000

This report is available on the Internet at:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/index.htm

And that was 2,000....probably reporting numbers collected from
1999...and today it's 2004, and the placements with kin have gone
up....so what have we here.....a stupid igorant Cacti, or a liar?

I vote for both...but then you are a protege of Douggie the
Magnificant Liar.

Additionally,

I can also assure you that states are not allowed to place with kin
unless the kin can pass similar constraints as stranger foster
caregivers (child safety being the issue) and even with cutting
corners a bit on that constraint the state cannot find enough that ARE
qualified in even minimal ways. Some have criminal backgrounds that
disqualify...such as violence agianst children, or felony assault
chargess.

Some are druggies, some other kinds of criminals. Some haven't enough
money to support themselves and would use the foster subsidy for
themselves and other children in the home to live on. We tax payers
don't approve of the latter.

Some sickos' like you among "kin" are in deep denial about the
parents, their sons, daughters, neices, nephews, sisters, brothers,
even grandchildren, and the things they did to the children, and
refuse to agree to keep the children well protected from their sick
and dangerous "kin."

And then there are the "kin" that are simply terrified of their
monsterous relative and won't have the children and risk retaliation
and more horror from the folks they wish they weren't related to by
blood or inlaw status.

You are just another one of Doug's lying crew, Coriopsis.


Source: http://www.childrensrights.org

R R R R .....really now. You present this as an objective reasonable
source?

Please.

Here are some useful and less biased sources to study this very
complex and difficult problem that CPS faces:

http://www.futureofchildren.org/info...?doc_id=210484

http://www.childwelfare.com/kids/CYSR24/cysr241and2.htm

http://library.adoption.com/Resource...le/3743/2.html

http://216.239.57.104/search?q=cache...hl=en&ie=UTF-8

http://naic.acf.hhs.gov/pubs/f_kinshi.cfm do a find on "barriers to"
to see why relatives sometimes turn down placements of kin with them.

I've hesitated to post direct sources for these things in the past
because I am a strong advocate, and have been since 1994, for kin
placement, and this information could be discouraging to relatives.

I trust they will, if reading these sources, overcome their reluctance
and do what needs to be done.

Pay no mind to fern, The Plant, as the states welcome you if you are
able, willing, and not disqualified...and they cut you lots of slack
as a relative....go for it...you've nothing to lose and a great deal
to gain in keeping children with their family.

Best of luck,

But not to Yew, Yew liar Yew .

Kane

Kane writes:

Now on to the lies that The Plant, yet another of the lying pack of
Douggie's hyenas, tries to foist about kinship care. Kane

Begin Fern5827's remarks, and mine following intersperced:

Begin Fern5827's remarks, Kane replies, and my responses:

Odd, I see figures only as low as 24% and up to 50% or more, going to
relatives for foster care and adoption.

In 2001, the average was 24% -- suggesting that there must be some states
reporting in with less that the mean and some reporting more.

Fern:

As it stands today, fewer than 27% of children supposedly abused or
neglected
are placed with kin or blood relatives.

R R R R ..... careful exiting your car. ..you'll stab someone with
that proboscis.

You recently posted something very different about LA county. And I
know you cannot provide proof of your 27% claim.

The basis of you doubting Fern's current figure may be your assumption that
the percentage of foster children in kinship care is increasing. Let's
stick to USDHHS statistics to double check Fern's figures.

Kane:

Let's look at the post and today...and compare not only the past
figures...but the trend to today......starting 6, that's 6 YEARS
AGO....

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/

I went to this URL. This report was published and submitted to Congress in
2000 -- four years ago. It does not reflect the trend TODAY.

"The Extent to Which Children in Foster Care Are Placed with Relatives

In 1998, approximately 2.13 million children in the United States, or
just under 3 percent, were living in some type of kinship care
arrangement. In 1997, approximately 200,000 children were in public
kinship care, well below 1 percent of all U.S. children but 29 percent
of all foster children. Available evidence suggests that public
kinship care has increased substantially during the late 1980s and
1990s (see Chapter 1).

(gee, Geranium, it wasn't as low as 27% even 6 years ago)

A year later, in 1999, only 26% of foster children were in kinship care.
That is lower than 27%, even 5 years ago.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...s/june2001.htm

In 2001, three years ago, only 24% of foster children were in kinship care.
That is lower than 27%, even three years ago ago. And lower than in 1999,
when it was 26%.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...rs/report8.htm

Oh, and in 2000 -- the year in between? Well, 25% of foster children were
in the care of kin during that year. That's lower than 27%, even 5 years
ago.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...rs/apr2001.htm

Your source claims 29% of foster children were in kinship care in 1998. To
get an idea of trends, let's look at a breakdown of the years we have
covered. These are the percentages of foster children in kinship care
nationwide.

1998 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%

Three main factors have contributed to this growth. First, the number
of non-kin foster parents has not kept pace with the number of
children requiring placement, creating a greater demand for foster
caregivers. Second, child welfare agencies have developed a more
positive attitude toward the use of kin as foster parents. Today,
extended family members are usually given first priority when children
require placement. Third, a number of Federal and State court rulings
have recognized the rights of relatives to act as foster parents and
to be compensated financially for doing so. "

Notice what it says about "Today?"
(don'tcha just hate it when I do that? R R R R R R E E E E E E O O O O
O R R R ....but you just keep posting lies without checking
first.....)

That was from:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
Administration on Children, Youth and Families
Children's Bureau

June 2000

This report is available on the Internet at:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/index.htm

And that was 2,000....probably reporting numbers collected from
1999...and today it's 2004, and the placements with kin have gone
up....so what have we here.....a stupid igorant Cacti, or a liar?

No, the report clearly states in the paragraph you cut and pasted that it is
talking about 1998. In 1999, it was 26%. In 2000, 25%. In 2001, 24%.
What source of information do you draw upon to conclude that placements with
kin have gone up?

I vote for both...but then you are a protege of Douggie the
Magnificant Liar.

Well, what basis do you have for your vote? The USDHHS data supports Fern's
estimate -- in fact, the AFCARS data report lesser percentages that 27% for
1999, 2000, and 2001. This evidence contradicts your contention that Fern
is "lying."

There is no evidence of your claim that the trend of kinship care is an
increase. You provide no evidence of current kinship care numbers. In
fact, all you did provide was 1998 data and the percentage of foster
children in kinship care decreased after that during 1999 -- 2001.

Have a cool evening.

Doug

In reviewing my post in this thread, I discovered I made a mistake. I will
correct that error in this post.

My sincere apologies to all.

Referring to Kane's cut and paste of data, I wrote that the reference to 29%
of foster children being in kinship care involved the year 1998. I was in
error. Those figures were from 1997, as his source clearly states.

The following corrections should be made (IN CAPS AND PARENTHESIS)

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Kane writes:

Now on to the lies that The Plant, yet another of the lying pack of
Douggie's hyenas, tries to foist about kinship care. Kane

Begin Fern5827's remarks, and mine following intersperced:

Begin Fern5827's remarks, Kane replies, and my responses:

Odd, I see figures only as low as 24% and up to 50% or more, going to
relatives for foster care and adoption.

In 2001, the average was 24% -- suggesting that there must be some states
reporting in with less that the mean and some reporting more.

Fern:

As it stands today, fewer than 27% of children supposedly abused or
neglected
are placed with kin or blood relatives.

R R R R ..... careful exiting your car. ..you'll stab someone with
that proboscis.

You recently posted something very different about LA county. And I
know you cannot provide proof of your 27% claim.

The basis of you doubting Fern's current figure may be your assumption
that
the percentage of foster children in kinship care is increasing. Let's
stick to USDHHS statistics to double check Fern's figures.

Kane:

Let's look at the post and today...and compare not only the past
figures...but the trend to today......starting 6, that's 6 YEARS
AGO....

http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/

I went to this URL. This report was published and submitted to Congress
in
2000 -- four years ago. It does not reflect the trend TODAY.

"The Extent to Which Children in Foster Care Are Placed with Relatives

In 1998, approximately 2.13 million children in the United States, or
just under 3 percent, were living in some type of kinship care
arrangement. In 1997, approximately 200,000 children were in public
kinship care, well below 1 percent of all U.S. children but 29 percent
of all foster children. Available evidence suggests that public
kinship care has increased substantially during the late 1980s and
1990s (see Chapter 1).

(gee, Geranium, it wasn't as low as 27% even 6 years ago)

(TWO YEARS LATER) A year later, in 1999, only 26% of foster children were
in kinship care.
That is lower than 27%, even 5 years ago.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...s/june2001.htm

In 2001, three years ago, only 24% of foster children were in kinship
care.
That is lower than 27%, even three years ago ago. And lower than in 1999,
when it was 26%.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...rs/report8.htm

Oh, and in 2000 -- the year in between? Well, 25% of foster children were
in the care of kin during that year. That's lower than 27%, even 5 years
ago.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...rs/apr2001.htm

Your source claims 29% of foster children were in kinship care in 1998
(1997). To
get an idea of trends, let's look at a breakdown of the years we have
covered. These are the percentages of foster children in kinship care
nationwide.

1998 (1997) 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%

Three main factors have contributed to this growth. First, the number
of non-kin foster parents has not kept pace with the number of
children requiring placement, creating a greater demand for foster
caregivers. Second, child welfare agencies have developed a more
positive attitude toward the use of kin as foster parents. Today,
extended family members are usually given first priority when children
require placement. Third, a number of Federal and State court rulings
have recognized the rights of relatives to act as foster parents and
to be compensated financially for doing so. "

Notice what it says about "Today?"
(don'tcha just hate it when I do that? R R R R R R E E E E E E O O O O
O R R R ....but you just keep posting lies without checking
first.....)

That was from:

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Administration for Children and Families
Administration on Children, Youth and Families
Children's Bureau

June 2000

This report is available on the Internet at:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/kinr2c00/index.htm

And that was 2,000....probably reporting numbers collected from
1999...and today it's 2004, and the placements with kin have gone
up....so what have we here.....a stupid igorant Cacti, or a liar?

No, the report clearly states in the paragraph you cut and pasted that it
is
talking about 1998 (1997). In 1999, it was 26%. In 2000, 25%. In 2001,
24%.
What source of information do you draw upon to conclude that placements
with
kin have gone up?

I vote for both...but then you are a protege of Douggie the
Magnificant Liar.

Well, what basis do you have for your vote? The USDHHS data supports
Fern's
estimate -- in fact, the AFCARS data report lesser percentages that 27%
for
1999, 2000, and 2001. This evidence contradicts your contention that Fern
is "lying."

There is no evidence of your claim that the trend of kinship care is an
increase. You provide no evidence of current kinship care numbers. In
fact, all you did provide was 1998 (1997) data and the percentage of
foster
children in kinship care decreased after that during 1999 -- 2001.

Have a cool evening.

Doug

Here is the trend of kinship foster care, expressed in percentage of foster
care population, after the correction. As it turns out, the numbers for
1998 were the same as 1997.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...99/ar0199a.htm

1997 29%
1998 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Here is the trend of kinship foster care, expressed in percentage of
foster
care population, after the correction. As it turns out, the numbers for
1998 were the same as 1997.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...99/ar0199a.htm

1997 29%
1998 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%



Kinship care has taken a beating because CPS fears it cannot control family
associations and has set unrealistic barriers to prevent licensing. Even a
marijuana bust 15 years ago will prevent and aunt or uncle, now with
children of their own, from caring for their neice or nephew.

I'm willng to be 99.9 percent of all foster kids try to reestablish
relationship with their families or relatives, prior to, and after
emancipation... however, depending on how long they've been wards of the
state.. they become strangers. Kinship care should not be viewed simply as
having a biological connection but I'd suggest friends of the family (or
child) should also be considered and sought out prior to foster care with a
stranger.

Many years ago.. I sought a foster kid who was known to me.. but because I
was known to the family I, too, was ineligible even thought I was licensed
and avaibable.

bobb

"bobb" wrote in message ...
"Doug" wrote in message
...
Here is the trend of kinship foster care, expressed in percentage of
foster
care population, after the correction. As it turns out, the numbers for
1998 were the same as 1997.
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...99/ar0199a.htm

1997 29%
1998 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%



Kinship care has taken a beating because CPS fears it cannot control family
associations and has set unrealistic barriers to prevent licensing. Even a
marijuana bust 15 years ago will prevent and aunt or uncle, now with
children of their own, from caring for their neice or nephew.

I'm willng to be 99.9 percent of all foster kids try to reestablish
relationship with their families or relatives, prior to, and after
emancipation... however, depending on how long they've been wards of the
state.. they become strangers. Kinship care should not be viewed simply as
having a biological connection but I'd suggest friends of the family (or
child) should also be considered and sought out prior to foster care with a
stranger.

Many years ago.. I sought a foster kid who was known to me.. but because I
was known to the family I, too, was ineligible even thought I was licensed
and avaibable.

bobb


A few years ago, I saw that in one state, I think it was either
Washington or Oregon, had set up a special program to recruit friends
and family members of black children to step forward and provide homes
for black children when they were taken into the system. This was
apparently in response to heavy criticism from the black community
regarding the disproportionate number of black children in the foster
care system. Essentially, the black community asked CPS if they
thought that black parents were "three times as abusive" as white
parents, since black children were three times more likely to be in
foster care.

Anyway, they had a separate website set up extolling the virtues of
maintaining children's bonds to the community, and they were
specifically assuring people who had a long-term bond with black
children, whether they were actual relatives by birth or marriage or
not, to step forward, and promising them a streamlined approval
process. In the meantime, over at the main website, the "standard"
rule was clearly laid out -- preference for placement was only offered
to grandparents, aunts, uncles, and adult siblings.

I have heard that when young, adoptable children are involved, local
grandparents who ask to take the children are told that they are "too
close" and can't be counted on to keep the children away from the bio
parents, while out-of-state grandparents are "too far away," and can't
be given the children because that would interfere with the stated
goal of reunification. As far as background checks go, this seems to
be all over the place. "Rilya" was given to grifters who claimed to
be blood relatives of some sort or another, while, as you say, some
people asking to have young relatives placed with them are turned down
for "ancient history" which would NOT have prevented them from
becoming foster parents to children who were unknown to them.

Even in cases in which CPS knows that it will be forced to turn the
children over to the grandparents at some point, they will often drag
their feet for as long as possible.

"bobb" wrote in message
...

"Doug" wrote in message
...
Here is the trend of kinship foster care, expressed in percentage of
foster
care population, after the correction. As it turns out, the numbers for
1998 were the same as 1997.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p...99/ar0199a.htm

1997 29%
1998 29%
1999 26%
2000 25%
2001 24%



Kinship care has taken a beating because CPS fears it cannot control
family
associations and has set unrealistic barriers to prevent licensing. Even
a
marijuana bust 15 years ago will prevent and aunt or uncle, now with
children of their own, from caring for their neice or nephew.

I'm willng to be 99.9 percent of all foster kids try to reestablish
relationship with their families or relatives, prior to, and after
emancipation... however, depending on how long they've been wards of the
state.. they become strangers. Kinship care should not be viewed simply
as
having a biological connection but I'd suggest friends of the family (or
child) should also be considered and sought out prior to foster care with
a
stranger.

Many years ago.. I sought a foster kid who was known to me.. but because I
was known to the family I, too, was ineligible even thought I was licensed
and avaibable.

bobb

Did you bother to read the other link that speaks to the reasons why kinship
care if difficult bobb? Here's a quote for you:

"
Barriers to Kinship Placements
Despite the value to children of remaining with their extended families, and
the concern of relatives about the future of their nieces, nephews, and
grandchildren, there are many reasons why adult relatives may be unwilling
to take on the responsibility of a child's care. Some just can't afford
another mouth to feed, especially if their only income is a social security
check. Indeed, a 1989 study by the National Black Child Development
Institute in Washington, DC, found that the most common reason relatives
felt they couldn't care for kin was "a lack of financial or housing
resources."

Others worry that they will not be able to get appropriate help to deal with
problems the children are almost certain to have-those that arise from their
unmet physical and developmental needs and their histories of family crisis.

"Unfortunately, America's child-serving systems have been slow to respond
and often don't give these children and their caregivers the services and
support they desperately need," confirms Robin Scott, program associate at
the Children's Defense Fund in Washington, DC. "It often keeps relatives
from taking them in."

"These kids come to us with problems we never had to deal with," says
Rosalee Cauley, director of Grandparents as Parents, a support group in
Lakewood, California, for grandparents raising their grandchildren. "Most
have been neglected and malnourished. Some have been abused. Others, like my
grandson, were born exposed to drugs and have serious emotional and learning
problems." She started her group, one of eight chapters in the State,
because of the unique needs and sparse support for grandparents who are
parenting a second set of children.

Unless relatives have legal custody of the children, they often face
additional problems associated with their less-than-parents status. They are
responsible for the children's health, safety, and well-being but may not
have authority to make medical and educational decisions on their behalf.
Then too, the children can be removed from their home at any time, against
their wishes, and returned to the birthparents.

That's what happened to Cauley. Her grandson, Josh, came to live with her
when he was two because his mother's drug addiction made it impossible for
her to care for him. Ten years later, the county child protection agency
returned Josh to his mother even though Cauley feared for her grandson's
welfare and fought the decision. Fortunately, Cauley and her husband were
awarded visitation rights. "We were his safety net," she says. However,
Josh's reunion with his mother did not work out; she continued to use drugs
and expose her son to an unstable lifestyle. A year later, he ran away from
his mother and back to his grandmother.

Cauley's organization is sometimes the only source of support for
grandparents whose care of young children puts them out of step with others
their age. "Friends are at a different stage in their lives -- one that
doesn't want a 3-year-old tagging along at lunch," says Cauley. "They stop
coming around. Their attitude is, 'Been there, done that."

Sometimes, the siblings of the child's birthmother are jealous and withdraw
support. They resent the attention their parents focus on the child,
sometimes at the expense of other grandchildren in the family.

Then, there is the problem of the birthparents. Some relatives do not want
the intrusion of a mother or father who may be disruptive or who is abusing
alcohol or drugs. They fear that the birthparents will be troublesome or
that they may end up with the unwelcome responsibility of taking care of
them as well."

The problems of Kinship care are less the systems fault than that of the
prospective placements. The state cannot "force" kinship care, they can
only ask.



Ron

Kane wrote refering to Fern:

So tell us, Tulip, what about the children returned to their parents under
state supervision?

This an interesting aside. What is the percentage (or number) of children
returned to parents under state supervison vice those returned absent
supervision?

bobb

I use to come to this discussion. Got turned off, plants have that way
about them. Anyway... I currently have a sibiling group of 4 (all with
different fathers except the twins) and have had them for 9 months. In
July they will either terminate or start the reunification process. It
is leaning towards termination. Of these four children whom have the
same mom but different dads, not a single relative wants to get
involved. Zero, zip, zilch. One aunt who would be fit does not want to
continuous problem with the bio mom. And as for the others they each
have their reasons. None for me to judge them by. So Fern, what option
is there? Beg and plea for a relative to take them? There actually is
one who would but has a criminal history herself. So they are with me.
They are safe, loved and very well taken care of. I also have a teen
whos parent signed off on her voluntarily! She does have a family member
that will most likely be adopting her. However they are in the
screening process. You can not just take a kid who has been through
living hell and hand them over to family because they are blood. You
must first make sure that the person is fit and capable of dealing with
the unique situation of the child. In this case I am sure the child
will be going to the relatives house. They have weekly visitation
together and in the meantime, again.... the child is safe, loved and
very well taken care of. In fact the child has already asked if they
can still come and visit me after being adopted out. To me that is
foster parenting. I am afraid to think what would happen if one of your
family members were pulled out Fern, and then just placed with you. I
have a feeling you have some mental instabiliies that would make you
unfit. Maybe not, but thats for the courts to decide. In the meantime,
I will continue to provide care and love and you will continue to moan
and groan because that is the end of your capabilities in this matter!