How is this helpful to the foster kids?

Question

Ok kids in foster care are taken because of abuse sexual physical or neglect right. Well it is my understanding that foster parents have to work with the birth parents. That makes sense. They are trying to get off of drugs go through parenting classes etc and the foster parent is supposed to allow visitation letters etc. But the birth parent is not supposed to know where you live. Everything is done supervised and in neutral locations. I am ok up until this point. In my state they are trying to minimize the hurt on the child and place the child as close to there home as possible. They want foster parents in the same school district or even the neighborhood. The idea is the kids won’t give up their friends and school and the pain will be less. The problem is doesn’t that make it harder to make the foster parents home private. The reality is until they work their plan those kids are in danger of their birth parents and if the birth parent knows they are in the same school they

Answer 1

thye usually do put kids in the same area they are from unless there are no foster homes available at the time.  and most parents do know where the children are living.  Its only kept hidden if there is if there are concerns of the child being taken or fear of violence by the parents.  The birth Mom in our case comes to visit the kids here at my house or sometimes we meet  at a park.  each case is different.

Answer 2

I totally agree with you. It does put the foster parents in a possible way of being harmed or the child. It doesn't seem to be right.

Answer 3

That istrue. I mean it would be scary to be close to my birth parent if they hadabused me...

Answer 4

i get what your saying and i agree if a child is taken from a their birth parents to a foster parents they should have no contanct with them at all with the risk of them wanting to go back  

you really didnt ask a ? so im just voiced my oppion

Answer 5

The reason why the state does this is they want to keepthe "family" together  no matter what. My siblings and I went through the samething when we were in foster homes. They wanted us to keep in touch with them so that we may become a family. We had the abuse and all kinds of other things going on but the state wanted us to be a family. I thank God each day that they signed there rights away so that we could move on with our lives and start over with someone who cared for us.

Answer 6

I think in situations where the threat is REAL, then I agree with you.  I do agree with the basic premis to keep other areas of their life as stable as possible.

Answer 7

no should not live in the same area, same city ok but not the same school district. but abuse doesnt always end with the parents. foster parents and group homes are not always the safest place for a child. its all about money. kids are abused in the system also.

Answer 8

Most kids still love their birth parents and want to be with them no matter what they have been thru!  They hope for the best and think that their parents will change!  And people can and do change, even tho it's very hard sometimes, like for people who are addicted to drugs

Answer 9

I agree with everyone's sentiments that if there is abuse, a bio parent should not "know" where a child is.  However, it is my understanding (at least with regards to foster care in NJ) that the "concept" of foster care is to be able to work with the bio parents whether thru counseling or classes, etc. and the ultimate goal is to reunite the original family.  Sometimes this doesn't work, as it did not in my son's case.  However, the caseworkers continued to tell us that their ultimate goal was to reunite our son with his bio parents until the bio parents refused to attend any appointments, etc.  So while I do understand (and agree) that bio parents should not have access to a child's foster family's address, etc., I do also somewhat understand the state's "concept" with wanting them close and staying in the child's life.

Answer 10

Where there is a real and valid threat against the child's safety or security then the parents should NOT know anything of where the child is. When I met my son's adoptive parents they were very relieved to see that I am a grounded and caring mother who has only my children's best interest at heart. They also have an adopted son who's mother is the opposite of me. She has tried numerous times to abduct her son; he was removed from her care by force due to pysical and emotional abuse, neglect, drug issue in the home, prostitution and sexual assault both on this child and his mother.  Keeping the families location secret was and is paramount to keeping this child safe. They were terrified to even meet me since it meant I would know their faces. Thankfully they agreed and I was able to abolish their fear that I would be the same as this other woman.

I know where my son live, it is a semi small community and there are only 4 jr high schools and 2 high schools. The thought of being able to walk into a school and possibly find him is ever in my mind. I will NEVER act on it, they assured me that when Justin is ready and willing to meet with me once again they will do everything in their power to make that happen. I do not doubt them. However, since they continue to be an emergency foster home their hands are tied by government red tape. If they were to give me contact their whole way of life could be left in upheaval. It is such a touch and go situation. Every case needs to be looked at in whole and not lumped together into a category, every situation is unique.

Answer 11

It makes a lot more sense for the foster kids that are taken because of a parent's substance abuse, rather than actual abuse of the child.  If there is physical or mental abuse, then I agree that teh child would be better off further away from the parent, but I can see how it would help both the parent and the child to see one another while a parent is trying to overcome substance abuse and get his or her own life back on track.  The parent and child could motivate each other to some extent and the children would probably resent less the system (and maybe the foster parents, themselves) who are intervening in their lives.  Similarly, if a parent is in jail, I can see the utility of keeping the child near to the parent so that there is less of a sense of dislocation and disconnectedness for the child.  Our foster system results in such bad outcomes for the majority of foster children, who find themselves completely unmoored from their families and lives and unable to find a solid anchor to rely on -- I can see how keeping a closer contact with their family, neighborhood, school, community might be a good idea for some (but not, as I said, for those who are actually abused by the parent-- more contact there is probably just more damaging).