In the first part of this five-part series, I discussed the fight between DSHS and Poca’s foster family.
Today, in part two, I go over some vital questions the media are mostly ignoring on this case.
Not Poca - Yet another cute kid
All the articles I’ve found on this case minimize the fact that so far as Poca is concerned, DSHS is not acting in a vacuum, but under the direction of the Superior Court. A Superior Court Judge ruled back in March (in dependency proceedings orginally brought by DSHS against Poca’s parents) that the Langley’s home was not suitable for Poca. According to an April 30th, 2009 DSHS press release, Snohomish County Superior Court Judge Anita Farris ruled:
“Regardless of how the CAPTA/licensing hearing turns out [a hearing to determine whether the Langleys would still get to be foster parents at all] the Langleys are not an appropriate placement, based on the court’s independent assessment of the evidence. The court remains concerned regarding return home, but also recognizes [the child] cannot remain with the Langleys. The court also recognizes that it would be traumatic to place [the child] in an unknown foster home.”
It is of course noteworthy that the court in the more recent licensing hearing ruled that the Langleys did not neglect Taylor or any other child. Nevertheless, it would be instructive to know what evidence Judge Farris saw that convinced her of that the Langley’s home was unsuitable for Poca.
The Langleys (who had cared for Poca for nearly four years) would not as foster parents ordinarily have the right to be present or represented by an attorney at the hearing where Judge Farris decided on Poca’s placement. Poca’s parents would have had the right to be present and represented and Poca’s interests would have been represented by a Guardian ad Litem who would (or at least should) have made his or her own independent investigation. We don’t know if Judge Farris was told that Poca’s neurologist thought she should not be moved. We don’t know what evidence Judge Farris might have seen that the neurologist knew nothing about.
It’s obvious that Judge Farris saw this as a tough case with no easy answers for Poca: there were concerns about the Langleys, concerns about Poca’s parents and also concerns about an unfamiliar foster home.
How bad are we at looking after our foster kids? Try this: 75% of the general population graduates from high school. Foster kids, the figure is half that – just 38%. Only 2% earn any kind of college degree. An amazing 37% will be incarcerated at some point in their adult lives.
I don’t pretend to know how wonderful (or neglectful) the Langleys are as foster parents, or where Poca should live, or whether someone at DSHS actually retaliated against the Langleys. DSHS obviously made several mistakes here, and it’s fairly clear that the Langleys at the very least bent a number of rules. DSHS is such an easy target that I have a feeling that there is a lot more to this story than we are hearing. I am very concerned whenever deeply entangled issues of child protection and public policy are spun in a facile manner that casts each player as either a saint or a villain.
The King 5 spin casts the Langleys as heroic victims so heavy handedly (“Their home’s in foreclosure after spending all they have on attorneys in hopes of overturning the decision to keep Poca in the only home she’s ever known.”) that the reality – that Poca has a legal right to be raised in her own biological family, unless that is proved to be contrary to her welfare – seems to get lost in the shuffle. That’s not to say that we shouldn’t treat foster parents better in general; we should, because there just aren’t enough people willing to take on these children.
Being separated from a child they had loved and cared for four years must have been heart breaking for the Langleys; but it doesn’t mean it was wrong for Poca. It doesn’t mean that another 14 years in an underfunded, poorly supervised foster care system would be better for her than life in her own family with her (hopefully now more sober) parents. This is less as a matter of good and evil and more as a question of proper funding and better organization.
May is National Foster Care Month. Originally a way of drawing attention to the contribution of foster carers and the difficult job we ask them to do, the focus has widened to include taking a hard look at the lives of foster kids as well as those who look after them. It’s a chance to hold up a mirror and ask ourselves what kind of job our village is doing in raising the children who need us most. The statistics used earlier in this article come from the website www.fostercaremonth.org, which also features some success stories about kids who have made healthy lives after leaving the system.
And let’s remember that for every case like the Langleys, where DSHS is criticized for unduly rushing reunification of children with their iffy parents, there is a case where people criticize DSHS for taking kids too quickly from their biological parents. These are tough issues, and sometimes there are really no good solutions. The laws and psychological theories of bonding, attachment, and reunification with damaged parents are complex and often contradictory.
Tomorrow, in part three, I explain why DSHS and the courts usually prefer reunification with biological parents.
Written by Christopher Rama Rao, with help from Katy Banahan.
2 Comments
The statement you made:
Dependency proceedings are not open to the public, or the press.
That is not correct. These proceedings have been open to the public since early 2003.
CC Tillett
Washington Families United
Vice-President
Child and Familiy Advocate
http://www.washingtonfamiliesunited.net
Hello,
A friend told me about this series. To be brief, our family wanted to adopt more children after adopting privately and I will tell you attempting to adopt in the foster care system was unbelievable. No one seemed to really care we were there….actively choosing to adopt in the United States. They kept wanting us to foster. We were interested in adopting only. This is rather unknown to them, I think they think of adoption as a failure on their part or something. We don’t! That’s how we, and so many of the adoptive families we know make our incredible heart filled families. Anyway we lived a nightmare while in the system on this journey and two years into it RAN from this system. The system is not well. The kids might be complex with all they’ve gone through, yet it is the adults in the system that we have chosen to leave and not return. Another family we started this journey to adopt with did the same thing and they ran to a private adoption instead. Ironically when I think about it when we first started pursuing adoption and had to take these foster classes, the agencies we interviewed to adopt a foster child, they tried to talk us into adopting overseas because they didn’t want to work with the state. These poor children here in the U.S. Too many people working in the foster care system I think are not trained certainly, yet I think they also are not trained to build families, rather they “place children” (or “kiddos” as they kept referring to them with this once removed innuendo) and these children do suffer because of the lack of model needed to build families and help them survive and thrive.
Anyway this truly is brief believe it or not. We have so many stories about what we experienced and would love them to go somewhere to help others understand why solid families like our come forward (actively for two years!) and walk away. We (decent solid loving families)are out there and the system wouldn’t have to be so desperate for families if they were healthier themselves and could not scare us away with the constant crisis model and incompetence. It was a lesson in feeling like they didn’t need us when so many thousands of children are waiting. It was a lesson in watching chaos for the children we pursued who had stories that should have had them being adopted years before we saw their picture in a book. We wish so much the fostercare system had an investigative branch. It does not. Perhaps more change could happen when more people could openly tell their stories? So many state agencies have this kind of protective layer. How does this system that oversees others neglect and abuse not have a level of investigation for their own? This would be very helpful I think.
Thank you for listening and please contact me anytime.
4 Trackbacks
[...] in part two of five, I discuss some vital questions the media are mostly ignoring on this [...]
[...] of this five-part series, I discussed 1) The fight between DSHS and Poca’s foster family; 2) Some vital questions the media is mostly ignoring on this case; and 3) Why DSHS and the Courts usually prefer [...]
[...] five-part series, I have discussed 1) The fight between DSHS and Poca’s foster family; 2) Some vital questions the media is mostly ignoring on this case; 3) Why DSHS and the Courts usually prefer reunification [...]
[...] this five-part series, I discussed 1) The fight between DSHS and Poca’s foster family; and 2) Some vital questions the media is mostly ignoring on this [...]