Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

In NYC, where I live, thanks to a number of highly publicized abuse cases which resulted in the death of the children, the policy of the NYC Dept. of Social Services became “When in doubt, yank ‘em out”. While this undoubtedly helped to provide protection to some very vulnerable children who needed it, it also led to an enormous number of children placed in foster care who should never have been removed from their homes. One of the most common occurrences was when a child saw his mother getting beaten up by her husband or boyfriend. Instead of booting the boyfriend out, the court removed the child from an “unsafe environment”, in effect punishing the child and the mother for the man’s actions. Tens of thousands of kids ended up in long-term foster care.

Once they decided too many children had been removed unnecessarily, the policy was changed to do everything possible to keep the family together. A lot of families that would have been broken up received preventive services to help the parents cope with stress. While this helped keep a lot of families together, it also put more children at the risk of abuse or neglect when it turned out that some families were resistant to in-home services or were so dysfunctional that they were beyond salvaging.

I don’t know what the answer is, beside the obvious conclusion that one size doesn’t fit all. But don’t make the mistake of thinking that 100,000 children in foster care means 100,000 children waiting for adoptive homes. For the great majority of those children, their birth families are still involved in their lives.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Mostly, I just think it’s sad that you can actually type out sentiments like “Let Ethiopia and those countries take care of their own children, and we’ll take care of ours.” I hope that you actively apply this philosophy in more areas, and aren’t a hypocrite about it. Like, I hope you are against American military involvement in the conflicts overseas (Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Israel…), because hell, why should you be over there in some other countries’ problems, geez. I also hope you are one of those who disdains for Angelina Jolie’s charitable works in various impoverished nations, as well as those of numerous other celebrities. They should use their money to feed and school AMERICANS only, right?

You gross me out, picklehaube.

Report this comment as spam or abuse

I mean, I am truly sorry for those children, but they should not take precedence over our own needy children. Let Ethiopia and those countries take care of their own children, and we’ll take care of ours. We cannot be the saviors of the world, nor should we try, because like I said, charity begins at home, and when people are traipsing all over the world to fix everyone else’s problems, who is going to fix ours? And yes I do care about American children over those from other countries, because I am an American and my country comes first. Sorry if that is not in line with the whole “global village” bullcrap, but that’s how I feel. Those children here without homes will grow up and live right here, and are more likely to cause problems down the road since they never had a stable, loving family…so it DOES affect us all, and anyone who does not see that is just sticking their head in the sand. Address these problems now, head them off at the pass if possible, or address them later, because we WILL have to do so at some point. Just the facts, people. If we don’t care about our own, who will? Certainly not Ethiopia or any other country….

Report this comment as spam or abuse

sorry i know i sound crazy…

anyway she has cray eyes in that pic. But, I like her alot. And i love Weeds.
I like pretty little black babies getting adopted! yay!

Report this comment as spam or abuse

As for the US vs. foreign adoption, which pops up whenever a celeb adopts a child, the issue isn’t one of being “trendy”. In the US, termination of parental rights is a lengthy process, meaning that children often spend several years in foster care, generally going to several homes, having parental reunification meetings, etc. Most children in the US who are legally free to be adopted are older. If you want to adopt a baby, your only option is really an open adoption, which a lot of people aren’t comfortable with (fyi, open adoption means that the birth parent(s) and the adoptive parents have an ongoing relationship during the child’s life). So if you want to adopt a younger baby in a more traditional “closed” adoption situation (no contact between birth parent(s) and adoptive parent(s)) then you have to go abroad.

Ultimately, if a child in need of a family gets one, who cares where the child is from?

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse

….secret’s in the sauce…

Report this comment as spam or abuse

Report this comment as spam or abuse