A Parenting & kids forum. ParentingBanter.com

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » ParentingBanter.com forum » alt.support » Foster Parents
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Part two of three...... For many foster children, hard life begins as adults



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 23rd 05, 07:06 AM
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Part two of three...... For many foster children, hard life begins as adults


.....part two of three.............

Yep, but I know they are not supposed to be experts, whose every
thought and declaration is based on them having a full understanding of
facts. The give that very special contribution though, a fresh eye, and
citizen oversight. I love'em, even if I stay factual about them and
their capacity. You remember what I used to say, "goverment requires
diligent citizen oversight."

Well, the 340% increase in funding went to out of home placements.

And both
the independent study and the current Grand Jury found that this

system was
still failing.


Where then did the money come from for the increase in cost for

each
investigation, noted by the UPenn study? Who is paying the

increased
cost for all those civilian investigators hired by the BSO


Your cited article about the grand jury says that BSO hired a mere 10


workers from DCF.


And you presume thats all they hired? And you presume that their pay
was peanuts? Let's assume, for a real laugh, their pay was $35k, per
annum. Let me see where IS that trusty calculator...gosh this is a
tough one.

$350,000 Dougger. Isn't that about what it would be? Got to come from
some'are's eh?

Would you mind pointing to the part of the report by the GJ that

shows
that them increase all went to out of home care? Thanks.


Sure.

"District 10 is now receiving $25,361,756 for out-of-home care,

according to
DCF figures, which is a 340% increase over the 1998 allocation.


And Dougger, isn't placement costs part of out of home care? And who
puts the child in placement and has to be paid their salary, Dougger?

It's spelled, I N V E S T I G A T O R, Douggie. One of the
out of home care costs. In fact, I've a hunch one of the reasons the
cops hired CPS workers for the job was to do the initial placement
planning...you know, what to write up for D'judge to see as to the
suggested outcome of the investigation, out of home, or return to home,
and then, Douggie, the service plan. Does DCF do it, or like times of
old when they did the investigation, does the intake investigator do
it?

Yah see, the GJ isn't going to get that all sorted out, and neither are
we from this remove. So we don't know what falls under that 340%
increase in WHO actually gets the money. It's sure not foster parents
all that much.

This
calculates to approximately $6,000 per child in out-of-home care

(foster
care, shelters, relative placements, and group homes), according to

DCF's
Administration."

Your source, about 1/4 way down the page.
http://www.sao17.state.fl.us/grandjury.htm


I love this one. You think it proves one thing, and to me, who knows
operations, it proves quite another.

"The Quality Service Review noted that District 10's performance

in
engaging the child and the biological and/or foster parents in any
meaningful way was deficient.


Now watch. That is NOT them. The Quality Service Review, if you can
read and follow and remember, was another private review, paid for by
the taxpayers, as a result of ...guess what...a class action suit...e e
e e ...

We asked a national expert in foster
care


There it is above. They are asking someone who is not, obviously, up to
speed o what they are talking about...unaware of their confusion.

why
District 10's foster caseworkers failed to implement such

obviously
beneficial practices as inclusion of the foster child's biological

family in
discussions and plans for the child and formulation of relevant

and
clearly
identified case plan goals and objectives.


Why WHAT? WHAT? WHAT? Why the foster care workers (they used
caseworkers and foster together mistakenly...they had been watching
vidoes of performance reviews and didn't understand who they were
watching.) hadn't done client casework?

RR R R R....WHAT A CACKLE.

Caseworkers normally do NOT do foster care worker duties, nor do foster
care workers do caseworker duties. They are in most places two
different sets.

The child's caseworker has NO time to do foster parent supervision.
They would only see them once a month, at best, and sometimes not that
if they met the child on their caseload elsewhere. Like in the office.
No, the foster parents have to have a single constant in their
lives...and can't be answering to five or six different caseworkers,
who they might have one for each of the children in their home.

The expert could not
explain this
failing.


Well, I guess. EHEHEHHEHEHE....TOO MUCH. And you fell for it, like the
ignorant phony you are.

So tell us, Douggie, how is a client caseworker with say 20
kids..probably many more in some places, on their caseload, who has to
place them going to FOSTER CARE WORKER say five or six foster parent
families, and do their client casework with child and parents? It's
impossible. The complexity is unsurmountable. The only place this is
done is in little rural burgs, and not that often there, with so few
cases one worker can go mad all by their lonesome and try to do it all.


Go ahead, fill us in, CASEWORKER!

Blown, Douggie, by yourself.

You've had "workers" doing investigations then ongoing work too on the
same case, and I suppose foster parent management, and adoption
homestudies, and appearing in court, and ...well, we KNOW, you and I,
me a former worker for CPS in the early 80s and you one now, how
complex and time consuming all this is.

R R R...I don't think I'll be able to sleep tonight. I just know I'll
wake up roaring with laughter.

Yah know, this is the part that is so wondefully confusing about

the
GJ. See above...they are asking why a Foster care worker isn't

doing
CASEWORK with the bio family. They pretty obviously do not know

that
Foster care workers work with the foster family and caseworkers

word
with client families. I worry that some of my own arguments from

this
document might be compromised by this ignorance of operational

facts.

Florida now calls its foster care caseworkers "family service

workers." The
Grand Jury uses this term interchangeably with the less formal

"caseworker"
and "worker."


I don't care what they are called. That is the client caseworker with
children in foster care. The FOSTER worker is a separate entity and has
to be. No client worker could handle the load of both kinds of families
to manage.

And the GJ got the two confused. That's why the expert on foster care
they consulted was unable to answer the incongruous question they asked
about why the "foster care worker" failed to do the client related
tasks. Foster care workers for foster families do NOT do client work or
contact, the latter by accident maybe, but not officially.

And I wonder that YOU, "caseworker" didn't catch that.


Nothing to catch, "non caseworker."


Oh? R R R R R R ....HEHEHEHEHH.........OOOOO....YER KILLIN' ME.

"It is clear that those caseworkers who fail to plan properly or

to
consult
with the child and the family, where appropriate, in constructing

case
plans, are actually making their jobs more difficult.


Notice we are now talking about the "caseworker" not the "foster
caseworkers."


Your duality. Not the Grand Jury's.


OH? I'll bet you'll try to say this statement is calling the same
worker by two different titles...it's from the document we are
considering:

"
Foster care workers and other family services workers are also
performing a dangerous job. In a recent DCF survey of its employees,
the greatest stress these family services workers identified was
concern for their own safety.
"

"Other family services workers?" What might THOSE be, Doug. Go ahead,
give us a list.

Why would a "foster care worker" be concerned for their personal
safety? They are doing foster care work. That isn't contact with
parents, just foster parents. Gosh, you don't suppose the foster
parents are made up of some of the folks we've had on this ng in the
not too distant passed? The ones that celebrated the death of a
caseworker by stabbing, and claimed Brian wouldn't have been a murderer
if he'd killed the workers he held up? Boy, that would be bad, eh?

No, Doug. It's because the "family service workers" are the client
caseworkers and the "foster care workers" would see ONLY the foster
families, and the children in those foster placements. Even if, and I
hope so, they have a high level of responsibility for the children
there and ARE doing the 30 day face to faces for the "family service
workers" they are NOT doing case planning. The very thing they confused
the foster care expert by asking about.

And you didn't sort this out correctly. Hmmmm...I wonder what's up with
that...as if I didn't figure you out for a phony two years ago...r r r
r

.....end of part two of three...........

 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Department of Human Services, shows that rates of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) among adults who were formerly placed in foster care (alumni), were up ... wexwimpy Foster Parents 0 April 7th 05 04:36 PM
The gift of foster care wexwimpy Foster Parents 0 May 29th 04 10:29 PM
'Horrible' Home Kane General 1 July 16th 03 02:29 AM
| Database should audit high $$ in Foster Care system Kane General 3 July 15th 03 06:43 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 ParentingBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.