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. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care
system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
xkatx wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ Although I'm not going to debate statistics or argue about anything (I know for a fact how our system in this part of Canada works, and although I don't know how ABC's info adds up to how we are over here - but I am assuming numbers are not far off) You have to think of what's the lesser evil. The costs are so high. It's tiresome to a point, but in order to just up and dispose of any foster system, you need to no longer have a need for it. Is the money worth it for the statistics to be basically horrible as far as everything goes, or is it better to allow children to be in crisis situations? Every foster home and foster parent or family has guidelines, and they're fairly strict as far as every day life goes for the homes. How would numbers sit if there were no alternatives (such as foster care)? Would abandon rates go up? Would welfare numbers go up? Would there be even more cases of abuse, neglect, would the situations be better or worse if you assume society is the same minus foster care? No, I don't know those answers, but it is something to ponder. A good boarding school may offer a child less harm, a better education, more support, but when the home situation is generally not good, and without foster care to help a percentage, how would the statistics stand for homelessness, prison numbers, welfare rates, etc... If you think of it according to numbers, only 48% don't suffer pts, 70% will wind up with some sort of roof over their head, 75% stay out of jail. Also, I'm not at all agreeing to the comment about children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care. There *is* a dad for every child as well. Anyways, is there really a better answer, alternative, way to go about the obvious problems that are clear? Sure, sweep the problems under the rug, stop keeping any records on incest, beating deaths, starvation, deliberate injuries, drug effects, and those other things that CPS takes children for no good reason 0:- and pretend it's gone. Soon the data on children will reflect only what the sick souls you answer in reply to want them to reflect. However, those children that survive will continue to flood, as adults, the mental health facilities, the prisons, and the graveyards...if they make it that far before they become adults. The illicit drug industry will continue to grow as those children no longer served by and protected by society self medicate into adulthood. The gangs will be overflowing with recruits, and illegal gun purveyors will fatten with the increased income. Hospital trauma centers will be overbooked 24/7 with lines out into the streets. We will have a lot of organ donors though, but sadly, many will have to be rejected because of drug and disease related injury and deterioration to organs. Meth will meet it's great potential and nearly replace most other drugs. Children will be made whores at an earlier age as they wise up to the truth around them, that society doesn't care what their parents do to them hence they have no worth other than what they have to sell. Sound weird. Well, ALL THIS IS HAPPENING RIGHT NOW. We ARE ignoring this problem, and it's being systematically lied about by those that DO want to do to their children just what they wish, no matter how damaging and cruel. They look like normal people, they can even talk like normal people, but in fact they are NOT normal people...yet they think they are. And they help each other by joining in special interest groups to lie about the problem as they number one strategic goal. You have met some here. Kane -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
the point of the post wasn't the statistics............they can be
debated endlessly by the simpleminded.............likewise, the notion that some bureaucratic glassware should be viewed as half full or half empty is equally irrelevant..............the newsworthiness is that a mainstream american television network devoted an hour-long segment of prime time programming and web site space to questioning the once sacrosanct system of foster care............as they might say at abc news, "that's the real story behind the story"............. xkatx wrote: wrote in message oups.com... abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ Although I'm not going to debate statistics or argue about anything (I know for a fact how our system in this part of Canada works, and although I don't know how ABC's info adds up to how we are over here - but I am assuming numbers are not far off) You have to think of what's the lesser evil. The costs are so high. It's tiresome to a point, but in order to just up and dispose of any foster system, you need to no longer have a need for it. Is the money worth it for the statistics to be basically horrible as far as everything goes, or is it better to allow children to be in crisis situations? Every foster home and foster parent or family has guidelines, and they're fairly strict as far as every day life goes for the homes. How would numbers sit if there were no alternatives (such as foster care)? Would abandon rates go up? Would welfare numbers go up? Would there be even more cases of abuse, neglect, would the situations be better or worse if you assume society is the same minus foster care? No, I don't know those answers, but it is something to ponder. A good boarding school may offer a child less harm, a better education, more support, but when the home situation is generally not good, and without foster care to help a percentage, how would the statistics stand for homelessness, prison numbers, welfare rates, etc... If you think of it according to numbers, only 48% don't suffer pts, 70% will wind up with some sort of roof over their head, 75% stay out of jail. Also, I'm not at all agreeing to the comment about children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care. There *is* a dad for every child as well. Anyways, is there really a better answer, alternative, way to go about the obvious problems that are clear? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
noooooooooooo, you missed the point, asshole.....................when
you've lost the mainstream media, your little pet overpriced make-work bureaucracy is screwed................... ]:^ runs around her dog lot barking you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand...............you don't understand............... |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
wrote in message
oups.com... abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus Hi, maggie, Former and present foster children represent the most endangered population in this country. Child welfare experts contend that the only way to reduce the abuse in foster care and the very poor outcomes for former foster children is to have less foster care. And reform movements are underway in many states and, on the federal level, to place less children into state custody and release foster children to their families earlier. Currently, the vast majority of children removed from their families were not abused. 69,000 of children placed in foster care in 2003 were removed from families CPS workers themselves unsubstantiated for risk of or actual neglect/abuse. These non-victims represent 30% of the foster care population. The majority of those who were substantiated were found to be at risk of neglect or neglected. Of those children substantiated as victims of abuse, the majority were substantiated because they were "at risk" of abuse, not actually abused. .............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............ The most vocal of foster care critics are professionals who are directly involved with it. Dr. Horn is one of the players in CPS reform efforts. .."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care The total cost of raising the child takes up about $14,000 of that. Foster children's medical, dental and mental health needs are covered by Medacaid. The remaining $26,000 goes to principals and workers in the child welfare industry itself. Administrative costs are many times much higher than 2/3 of the funding going into foster care, although 66% is the general rule. For each foster child, there is a battery of GALS, social service workers, state caregivers, case managers, mentors, partridges, pear trees and the trees in which they roost. .....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ .....And pay for their college. The overcrowded and abusive foster care system described by ABC news became that way because of what the Pew Commission calls "the perverse funding incentive" provided state CPS agencies to remove children from their families. Federal Title IV-E Social Security Funding currently flows to the states on the basis of how many poor children CPS takes into custody. As long as the child stays in foster care, the state agencies pull down the uncapped, on demand Title IV-E funding. As the result of the Pew Commission report, Congress is currently at work to remove the strings to Title IV-E funding. The money will become a capped entitlement to the states, allowing CPS agencies to decide for themselves how to spend the money. This will cut the foster population by as much as 80% across the country. The reform legislation, partially because of Dr. Wade's support, will soon be passed by Congress. This is the reform legislation the Organization of American Counties and CPS attempted to defeat through a lobbying campaign about the Meth "epidemic." Meanwhile, individual states have reduced their foster care poplulation by applying for and being granted exclusions from Title IV-E funding restrictions. California, Iowa and other states were just granted Title IV-E waivers. We can expect the state that harbors close to half of the nation's foster children to reduce the population of state wards by 50% over the next three years. Mamouth reductions in foster care populations have occurred in Illinois, Oregon and other states granted Title IV-E waivers in the past. It won't be long, now. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
Doug wrote:
wrote in message oups.com... abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus Hi, maggie, Former and present foster children represent the most endangered population in this country. And they came by it in the majority from their origins, the family they were born into. Child welfare experts contend Some do. that the only way to reduce the abuse in foster care and the very poor outcomes for former foster children is to have less foster care. And some do not. Some believe that adequately funding the system for lower caseloads WILL in fact move children through the system more rapidly to permanency. Better funding will result in not just lower caseloads...a problem pointed out BY EXPERTS even you have quoted, Doug, but allow for hiring and training more qualified workers. And reform movements are underway in many states and, on the federal level, to place less children into state custody and release foster children to their families earlier. Which has NOT proven yet to be the safest course. Parents have been known, as you know perfectly well, to re-abuse these same children. YOU quoted, in another argument, figures showing high rates of re-offending. Currently, the vast majority of children removed from their families were not abused. That is only true if you count raw numbers of removals...and ignore those that are returned in short order. 69,000 of children placed in foster care in 2003 were removed from families CPS workers themselves unsubstantiated for risk of or actual neglect/abuse. When you claim "not abused" you are ignoring the research I posted here that shows that "not abuse" and "unsubstantiated for abuse or neglect" are not the same thing, nor the same yardstick. Substantiation is a service needs driven assessment label, not a legal definition of abuse. These non-victims represent 30% of the foster care population. "Victim" and "substantiated" are not interchangeable terms, as you delusional claim. The study I provided you done for the USDHHS shows clearly that you are not correct, and your insistence on ignoring it is what earns you the title I give you of liar. The majority of those who were substantiated were found to be at risk of neglect or neglected. Yes? 0:- Of those children substantiated as victims of abuse, the majority were substantiated because they were "at risk" of abuse, not actually abused. Nonsense babbling again, Doug? ............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............ The most vocal of foster care critics are professionals who are directly involved with it. Dr. Horn is one of the players in CPS reform efforts. R R R R, volume does not equate with accuracy or expertise, Doug. Wade Horn is identified as an anti-women's rights appointee to a political office. Wade makes the same mistake I've pointed out to you repeatedly and you have ignored or minimized. The concept of upfront services has two major stumbling blocks, closely related to each other. Those who NEED the up front services do NOT present themselves for those services. Criminals, addicts/substance abusers, mentally ill. And especially those guilty of abusing, or placing their children at risk. They are NOT your self development conscious population that self assess as needing help and seeking it. Which brings me to point to, and something that this administration is becoming a major concern of the public over: if up front services are to be delivered they will have to be delivered by heavy intrusive efforts. These take the disguise of "public services agents" calling up people to "volunteer" the services, but always with the hint and occasionally the open threat of action if the "services" are not "volunteered for." You and others here like you have even argued this very same thing yourself in the context of the current system. I suggest you carefully read Wade's statements from last year, for this very content. Nicely worded, not at all obvious, but to one that has followed CPS and related agencies, and the paths that legislation has taken, it is more than clear. It is moving the point of entry of government, not removing it. And it will have similar outcomes. Those that cannot or will not present themselves will be on a list. And the very thing YOU ****ants claim is being done, that is not, WILL BE A FACT OF LIFE: That CPS will be charged with HUNTING child abuse, rather than taking incoming calls only. The agency may not BE CPS, but other agencies will apply for grants, hire new workers, and out they will go into the field. "Nurses," "community service Workers," from fields as diverse as health, and recreation (Recreation is a favorite place to focus on children and their parents and signs of abuse when government wants to intrude on families.) http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola..._testimony.htm Then read: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola...905_child.html And you will see the trend. As for Wade himself, and the politics surrounding him, (and don't EVEN try your bull**** of attempting to separate the quality and content of someone's claims from their character and milieu with me, asshole), you might want to look at the criticisms: http://www.mediatransparency.org/per...hp?personID=89 The politics are, well, business as usual. YOU just want the money to move from one place to another. Do you have a personal interest in this, Doug? A financial one? ."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care The total cost of raising the child takes up about $14,000 of that. Foster children's medical, dental and mental health needs are covered by Medacaid. The remaining $26,000 goes to principals and workers in the child welfare industry itself. It isn't an industry. No profits accrue to anyone. Administrative costs are many times much higher than 2/3 of the funding going into foster care, although 66% is the general rule. For each foster child, there is a battery of GALS, social service workers, state caregivers, case managers, mentors, partridges, pear trees and the trees in which they roost. You are lying. And YOU have applauded the use of GALS, and social workers. A case manager is a case worker. Stop your lying. There are no partridges, other than computer support, clerical support, utility fees, building rents, transport for children, and often parent clients, etc., and as far as I know, "no pear trees and the trees in which they roost." Trees resting in trees, Doug? You obviously aren't paying attention to what YOU are writing, and you most certainly ARE patronizingly playing on your belief in the ignorance and or stupidity of the readers. Who, hopefully really AREN'T as stupid as you patronizingly make them out to be with your nonsense. Bio families do not have the expenses related to abused children, unless they abuse and neglect and are responsible enough to pay themselves for the outcomes. We can presume the $14,000 per child figure is not for that population. ....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ ....And pay for their college. The overcrowded and abusive foster care system described by ABC news became that way because of what the Pew Commission calls "the perverse funding incentive" provided state CPS agencies to remove children from their families. You are ignoring, and thus misleading (called "lying" in some circles) the rest of what the Pew commission found. And what others have found. The abuse and neglect has taken on a much more perverse color than in the past, with far greater injury with more serious outcomes that cost a great deal more to treat. Number ARE going up, NOT down. Federal Title IV-E Social Security Funding currently flows to the states on the basis of how many poor children CPS takes into custody. A simplistic way of describing something that is more comprehensive than just the poverty level. However, the poor neglect and abuse their children at a higher rate than the non-poor. It's just a simple fact. Nothing complex. They are often poor for reasons that are not just lack of ability to find a job. People that don't abuse, and become poor, do not start abusing because they are poor. People that live lifestyles that include abusive child rearing and are poor do not stop abusing even if you provide them money. This has all been tried before and failed. As long as the child stays in foster care, the state agencies pull down the uncapped, on demand Title IV-E funding. Appeals to emotions with loaded word choice, like 'pull down' leading one to believe that they are 'making money' by this process. They are spending money at a faster rate than they are getting it because of the load on the system. As for the TRUE reaction to PEW commission report, you need to go beyond your bull**** propaganda, Doug. http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=63622 [[[ Notice they are saying the same thing I am saying. Funding has been a perpetual problem .. in all areas of child protection, including the courts. They too have been underfunded, badly. ]]] home today's news about USN USN services contact USN media services news sources search Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care 4/5/2006 2:53:00 PM To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor Contact: The Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, 202-687-0948; Web: http://www.pewfostercare.org News Advisory: -- Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care -- Thursday, April 6, 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., U.S. Capitol Building, Room H-137, Washington, D.C. No child enters or leaves foster care without a judge's approval. Given the critical role of juvenile and family courts in children's lives, the nonpartisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care called for sweeping court reforms to protect children in foster care and secure safe, permanent families for them. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes new provisions to improve the juvenile and family courts that reflect some of the Pew Commission's recommendations. These new court improvements will help courts track and analyze their caseloads to improve outcomes for children in foster care, allow judges and other court personnel to receive needed training, and encourage collaboration between courts and child welfare agencies. The DRA provides $100 million over five years for these court improvements. These new court provisions add critical momentum to the efforts of states to improve their child welfare and court systems. At this briefing, members of the Pew Commission, Congressional leaders, judges, court leaders and federal officials will explore the potential impact of these court improvements on children in foster care throughout the United States. Participants include: THE HONORABLE BILL FRENZEL, Chairman, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Guest Scholar, Economic Studies, The Brookings Institution THE HONORABLE WALLY HERGER (R-CA), Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means THE HONORABLE WADE HORN, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services THE HONORABLE JOAN OHL, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services THE HONORABLE LEE F. SATTERFIELD, Associate Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Former Presiding Judge, D.C. Family Court WILLIAM C. VICKREY, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Administrative Director of the Courts, California Administrative Office of the Courts CLARICE DIBBLE WALKER, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Former Commissioner, D.C. Social Services http://www.usnewswire.com/ -0- /© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ As the result of the Pew Commission report, Congress is currently at work to remove the strings to Title IV-E funding. The money will become a capped entitlement to the states, allowing CPS agencies to decide for themselves how to spend the money. This will cut the foster population by as much as 80% across the country. It will defund, which will, of course, dump kids OUT of the foster system, or close the doors to them when they need protection. The pendulum will swing again. The size of the needed workforce will increase to "give" those upfront services that Wade is so supportive of. More AGENTS of the government will make attempts at entre' to homes and family. YOU, and they, are stupid. The reform legislation, partially because of Dr. Wade's support, will soon be passed by Congress. This is the reform legislation the Organization of American Counties and CPS attempted to defeat through a lobbying campaign about the Meth "epidemic." Bull****. CPS has little to do with the reporting on meth. The news services are sending journalist and reporters out to find out for themselves and they are finding that indeed there IS such an epidemic and it's have devastating impact on families and children. You are a propagandist, and it appears you are one for the current administration on these matters. Meanwhile, individual states have reduced their foster care poplulation by applying for and being granted exclusions from Title IV-E funding restrictions. California, Iowa and other states were just granted Title IV-E waivers. We can expect the state that harbors close to half of the nation's foster children to reduce the population of state wards by 50% over the next three years. Mamouth reductions in foster care populations have occurred in Illinois, Oregon and other states granted Title IV-E waivers in the past. It won't be long, now. It will be about two to three years before we see the first signs of this boondoggle. Watch. Just as I predicted the upsurge in meth related issues for child protection and the country I predict that child abuse rates, once we change administrations, will be correctly reported and they will skyrocket. Families will not present themselves for "up front services" and we'll see more and more clever "agencies" with specially trained, expensive, workers going out to find ways into homes. Having done so more abuse will be uncovered than ever before...because our system and society has resisted intrusion into the family...and that will break down. That IS the goal of certain factions now influencing legislation, and they are poised to do those intrusion under color of law. They are NOT family friendly...just "family model" friendly, and the objective is to NOT allow for non-biblical model families to exist. You will see the gates to hell open on this one, Doug. If they carry it off. 5 years at the outside before the public discovers they have been conned by you and your kind. 0:- And for those that care, another opinion on Wade and his politics and values, which of course boils down to biases: http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyt...ry.asp?id=5474 -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
"0:-" wrote in message news:MJydneVtqeFYix7ZnZ2dnUVZ_sidnZ2d@scnresearch. com... Doug wrote: wrote in message oups.com... abc's primetime did a june 1 story on "the crisis of the foster care system"..............among abc's conclusions were 52 percent of foster children suffered from post-traumatic stress (a rate twice as high as soldiers returning from war).............thirty percent of the homeless have been in foster care............ twenty-five percent of those in prison are foster care alumnus Hi, maggie, Former and present foster children represent the most endangered population in this country. And they came by it in the majority from their origins, the family they were born into. Child welfare experts contend Some do. that the only way to reduce the abuse in foster care and the very poor outcomes for former foster children is to have less foster care. And some do not. Some believe that adequately funding the system for lower caseloads WILL in fact move children through the system more rapidly to permanency. Better funding will result in not just lower caseloads...a problem pointed out BY EXPERTS even you have quoted, Doug, but allow for hiring and training more qualified workers. And reform movements are underway in many states and, on the federal level, to place less children into state custody and release foster children to their families earlier. Which has NOT proven yet to be the safest course. Parents have been known, as you know perfectly well, to re-abuse these same children. YOU quoted, in another argument, figures showing high rates of re-offending. Currently, the vast majority of children removed from their families were not abused. That is only true if you count raw numbers of removals...and ignore those that are returned in short order. Doug is quite correct, the majority are not removed for abuse. They are removed for neglect. And as figures point out, neglect is by far the greater killer of children. Figures show that 2.1 kids per thousand were abused, but 7.4 per thousand were neglected. http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/p.../figure3_3.htm 69,000 of children placed in foster care in 2003 were removed from families CPS workers themselves unsubstantiated for risk of or actual neglect/abuse. When you claim "not abused" you are ignoring the research I posted here that shows that "not abuse" and "unsubstantiated for abuse or neglect" are not the same thing, nor the same yardstick. Substantiation is a service needs driven assessment label, not a legal definition of abuse. Doug does not care about facts, they get in the way of his agenda. Ron These non-victims represent 30% of the foster care population. "Victim" and "substantiated" are not interchangeable terms, as you delusional claim. The study I provided you done for the USDHHS shows clearly that you are not correct, and your insistence on ignoring it is what earns you the title I give you of liar. The majority of those who were substantiated were found to be at risk of neglect or neglected. Yes? 0:- Of those children substantiated as victims of abuse, the majority were substantiated because they were "at risk" of abuse, not actually abused. Nonsense babbling again, Doug? ............. like welfare, foster care is intergenerational (children growing up in foster care can become mothers with children in foster care........... "the highest ranking federal official in charge of foster care, wade horn of the department of health and human services, is a former child psychologist who says the foster care system is a giant mess and should just be blown up"............ The most vocal of foster care critics are professionals who are directly involved with it. Dr. Horn is one of the players in CPS reform efforts. R R R R, volume does not equate with accuracy or expertise, Doug. Wade Horn is identified as an anti-women's rights appointee to a political office. Wade makes the same mistake I've pointed out to you repeatedly and you have ignored or minimized. The concept of upfront services has two major stumbling blocks, closely related to each other. Those who NEED the up front services do NOT present themselves for those services. Criminals, addicts/substance abusers, mentally ill. And especially those guilty of abusing, or placing their children at risk. They are NOT your self development conscious population that self assess as needing help and seeking it. Which brings me to point to, and something that this administration is becoming a major concern of the public over: if up front services are to be delivered they will have to be delivered by heavy intrusive efforts. These take the disguise of "public services agents" calling up people to "volunteer" the services, but always with the hint and occasionally the open threat of action if the "services" are not "volunteered for." You and others here like you have even argued this very same thing yourself in the context of the current system. I suggest you carefully read Wade's statements from last year, for this very content. Nicely worded, not at all obvious, but to one that has followed CPS and related agencies, and the paths that legislation has taken, it is more than clear. It is moving the point of entry of government, not removing it. And it will have similar outcomes. Those that cannot or will not present themselves will be on a list. And the very thing YOU ****ants claim is being done, that is not, WILL BE A FACT OF LIFE: That CPS will be charged with HUNTING child abuse, rather than taking incoming calls only. The agency may not BE CPS, but other agencies will apply for grants, hire new workers, and out they will go into the field. "Nurses," "community service Workers," from fields as diverse as health, and recreation (Recreation is a favorite place to focus on children and their parents and signs of abuse when government wants to intrude on families.) http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola..._testimony.htm Then read: http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/programs/ola...905_child.html And you will see the trend. As for Wade himself, and the politics surrounding him, (and don't EVEN try your bull**** of attempting to separate the quality and content of someone's claims from their character and milieu with me, asshole), you might want to look at the criticisms: http://www.mediatransparency.org/per...hp?personID=89 The politics are, well, business as usual. YOU just want the money to move from one place to another. Do you have a personal interest in this, Doug? A financial one? ."there are no provisions for treatment, prevention, family support, or aging out - just for supporting things as they are"..........that status quo costs taxpayers $22 billion a year and works out to $40,000 a year to keep a child in foster care The total cost of raising the child takes up about $14,000 of that. Foster children's medical, dental and mental health needs are covered by Medacaid. The remaining $26,000 goes to principals and workers in the child welfare industry itself. It isn't an industry. No profits accrue to anyone. Administrative costs are many times much higher than 2/3 of the funding going into foster care, although 66% is the general rule. For each foster child, there is a battery of GALS, social service workers, state caregivers, case managers, mentors, partridges, pear trees and the trees in which they roost. You are lying. And YOU have applauded the use of GALS, and social workers. A case manager is a case worker. Stop your lying. There are no partridges, other than computer support, clerical support, utility fees, building rents, transport for children, and often parent clients, etc., and as far as I know, "no pear trees and the trees in which they roost." Trees resting in trees, Doug? You obviously aren't paying attention to what YOU are writing, and you most certainly ARE patronizingly playing on your belief in the ignorance and or stupidity of the readers. Who, hopefully really AREN'T as stupid as you patronizingly make them out to be with your nonsense. Bio families do not have the expenses related to abused children, unless they abuse and neglect and are responsible enough to pay themselves for the outcomes. We can presume the $14,000 per child figure is not for that population. ....................beyond abc's findings, the per annum cost per child in foster care would keep a child in a good boarding school............ ....And pay for their college. The overcrowded and abusive foster care system described by ABC news became that way because of what the Pew Commission calls "the perverse funding incentive" provided state CPS agencies to remove children from their families. You are ignoring, and thus misleading (called "lying" in some circles) the rest of what the Pew commission found. And what others have found. The abuse and neglect has taken on a much more perverse color than in the past, with far greater injury with more serious outcomes that cost a great deal more to treat. Number ARE going up, NOT down. Federal Title IV-E Social Security Funding currently flows to the states on the basis of how many poor children CPS takes into custody. A simplistic way of describing something that is more comprehensive than just the poverty level. However, the poor neglect and abuse their children at a higher rate than the non-poor. It's just a simple fact. Nothing complex. They are often poor for reasons that are not just lack of ability to find a job. People that don't abuse, and become poor, do not start abusing because they are poor. People that live lifestyles that include abusive child rearing and are poor do not stop abusing even if you provide them money. This has all been tried before and failed. As long as the child stays in foster care, the state agencies pull down the uncapped, on demand Title IV-E funding. Appeals to emotions with loaded word choice, like 'pull down' leading one to believe that they are 'making money' by this process. They are spending money at a faster rate than they are getting it because of the load on the system. As for the TRUE reaction to PEW commission report, you need to go beyond your bull**** propaganda, Doug. http://releases.usnewswire.com/GetRelease.asp?id=63622 [[[ Notice they are saying the same thing I am saying. Funding has been a perpetual problem .. in all areas of child protection, including the courts. They too have been underfunded, badly. ]]] home today's news about USN USN services contact USN media services news sources search Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care 4/5/2006 2:53:00 PM To: Assignment Desk, Daybook Editor Contact: The Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, 202-687-0948; Web: http://www.pewfostercare.org News Advisory: -- Strengthening Courts, Improving Foster Ca A Progress Report from the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care -- Thursday, April 6, 10 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., U.S. Capitol Building, Room H-137, Washington, D.C. No child enters or leaves foster care without a judge's approval. Given the critical role of juvenile and family courts in children's lives, the nonpartisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care called for sweeping court reforms to protect children in foster care and secure safe, permanent families for them. The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005 includes new provisions to improve the juvenile and family courts that reflect some of the Pew Commission's recommendations. These new court improvements will help courts track and analyze their caseloads to improve outcomes for children in foster care, allow judges and other court personnel to receive needed training, and encourage collaboration between courts and child welfare agencies. The DRA provides $100 million over five years for these court improvements. These new court provisions add critical momentum to the efforts of states to improve their child welfare and court systems. At this briefing, members of the Pew Commission, Congressional leaders, judges, court leaders and federal officials will explore the potential impact of these court improvements on children in foster care throughout the United States. Participants include: THE HONORABLE BILL FRENZEL, Chairman, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Guest Scholar, Economic Studies, The Brookings Institution THE HONORABLE WALLY HERGER (R-CA), Chairman, Subcommittee on Human Resources of the Committee on Ways and Means THE HONORABLE WADE HORN, Assistant Secretary for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services THE HONORABLE JOAN OHL, Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services THE HONORABLE LEE F. SATTERFIELD, Associate Judge, Superior Court of the District of Columbia, Former Presiding Judge, D.C. Family Court WILLIAM C. VICKREY, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Administrative Director of the Courts, California Administrative Office of the Courts CLARICE DIBBLE WALKER, Member, Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, Former Commissioner, D.C. Social Services http://www.usnewswire.com/ -0- /© 2006 U.S. Newswire 202-347-2770/ As the result of the Pew Commission report, Congress is currently at work to remove the strings to Title IV-E funding. The money will become a capped entitlement to the states, allowing CPS agencies to decide for themselves how to spend the money. This will cut the foster population by as much as 80% across the country. It will defund, which will, of course, dump kids OUT of the foster system, or close the doors to them when they need protection. The pendulum will swing again. The size of the needed workforce will increase to "give" those upfront services that Wade is so supportive of. More AGENTS of the government will make attempts at entre' to homes and family. YOU, and they, are stupid. The reform legislation, partially because of Dr. Wade's support, will soon be passed by Congress. This is the reform legislation the Organization of American Counties and CPS attempted to defeat through a lobbying campaign about the Meth "epidemic." Bull****. CPS has little to do with the reporting on meth. The news services are sending journalist and reporters out to find out for themselves and they are finding that indeed there IS such an epidemic and it's have devastating impact on families and children. You are a propagandist, and it appears you are one for the current administration on these matters. Meanwhile, individual states have reduced their foster care poplulation by applying for and being granted exclusions from Title IV-E funding restrictions. California, Iowa and other states were just granted Title IV-E waivers. We can expect the state that harbors close to half of the nation's foster children to reduce the population of state wards by 50% over the next three years. Mamouth reductions in foster care populations have occurred in Illinois, Oregon and other states granted Title IV-E waivers in the past. It won't be long, now. It will be about two to three years before we see the first signs of this boondoggle. Watch. Just as I predicted the upsurge in meth related issues for child protection and the country I predict that child abuse rates, once we change administrations, will be correctly reported and they will skyrocket. Families will not present themselves for "up front services" and we'll see more and more clever "agencies" with specially trained, expensive, workers going out to find ways into homes. Having done so more abuse will be uncovered than ever before...because our system and society has resisted intrusion into the family...and that will break down. That IS the goal of certain factions now influencing legislation, and they are poised to do those intrusion under color of law. They are NOT family friendly...just "family model" friendly, and the objective is to NOT allow for non-biblical model families to exist. You will see the gates to hell open on this one, Doug. If they carry it off. 5 years at the outside before the public discovers they have been conned by you and your kind. 0:- And for those that care, another opinion on Wade and his politics and values, which of course boils down to biases: http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyt...ry.asp?id=5474 -- "Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin (or someone else) |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
the more you post, the more you sound like the old drunk joe mccarthy
ranting about a communist under every bed................ ]:^ runs around her dog lot barking about abusive parents................ |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
abc's crisis of the foster care system (cross-posted)
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
OT but for all Foster Parents: NFPA Position Statements | PopInJay | Foster Parents | 1 | June 10th 05 03:06 AM |
Blacks in foster care disproportionately | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | July 9th 04 05:40 PM |
FOSTER CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND EDUCATIONAL DEVELOPMENT OFTEN IGNORED, PACKARD FOUNDATION REPORT FINDS | wexwimpy | Foster Parents | 0 | April 17th 04 04:55 PM |
Basic Rights of Foster Parents | [email protected] | Foster Parents | 5 | December 20th 03 02:37 PM |
| Database should audit high $$ in Foster Care system | Kane | General | 3 | July 15th 03 06:43 AM |