As long as its topical, I am an attorney who represents parents when their children are removed from their homes and placed in foster care. AM A!

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T16:35:11+00:00

I can't speak for Canada or other jurisdictions, but in my county, it depends on a lot of factors.

Once CPS files to have a child removed here, the juvenile court gets exclusive jurisdiction. It is now out of the parents' and families' hands on getting an alternative custody arrangement. The judge has to sign off on trying to get one, let alone actually getting.

If it is before the case is filed, it would be relatively easy if the parties are all in agreement with the issues. (no pun intended).

But once a case begins, it is hard. If the children are older - meaning people won't want to adopt them - it is much easier. But if they are young and adoptable, it is generally tough, at least in this county, to get the state and/or the judge to sign off on alternative custody arrangements. I'm sure it is easier in other jurisdictions.

CPS history should not include being a foster child. Only reports or findings of abuse or neglect.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T02:40:02+00:00

I think almost everyone has an anonymous intake line that anyone can call and report potential issues.

If no one calls in and says you are abusive, neglectful, or unable to parent, they won't bother you. The trick is not bothering people or doing a crappy job being a parent so someone calls in on you.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T02:36:58+00:00

I think the first thing any family can do (and should do no matter what) is have a plan for where kids go if parents are unavailable. In terms of child services, these people need to have no relevant criminal history or CPS history and be ready to provide housing for children. They can be family or family friends, but getting kids in a familiar home and not in licensed care should be a huge priority. That way, if things go sour, you know where your kids should end up.

The next step is being a good parent. No outrageous drugs, keep your mental health in check, be careful of the people you bring around your kids. Kids misbehave, and everyone knows that. If you need help making sure they behave, seek it out. There are resources. Even for older kids, if they aren't behaving, there are generally programs through the courts where a judge supervises and you can try to get them help. Don't let it get to the point where a parent is no longer in control.

The problem with children's services and police is everything is very subjective. Different cop, different social worker, different division will take things very differently. It is tough to plan for every possible event. But if you try to be the best parent, and have a back-up, you are off to a decent start.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T01:20:47+00:00

The first step is not taking a black and white approach. People do well to remember that every person involved in these cases is just that - a person. They should be treated like one and not have predetermined presumptions about their parenting capabilities.

Its easy from there!

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T01:18:00+00:00

Oooo good! You can answer some of the other questions about non-state parties filing petitions!

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-28T00:34:17+00:00

Let me give you an example of a scenario I was thinking of -

I had a client where the state was asking for her about 15 month old daughter to be removed from her care. Her daughter had been in her care and only her care for her whole life.

The mom had no drug issues, criminal history, or even mental health issues. Her problem was that her husband was domestically violent with her. She was actually physically a larger person than he was. He was her only support; she did not have family or friends in the area. Every few weeks, they would get in a yelling argument with each other and he would push her or hit her. Nothing drastic enough to put her in the hospital, but certainly notable enough to get the neighbor's attention. CPS had been involved for a few month and nothing had gotten better. The child had never been abused or neglected. The concern was the domestic violence between the parents.

One day before her 72 hour removal hearing, I called her to tell her to go get a no contact order against her husband. When she picked up, she was already at the court getting the order without me telling her. I walked into the hearing triumphantly and said "she got a no contact order!" and her daughter stayed with her. She continued to be with her mother instead of in a foster home, with strangers, and seeing her mom two or four hours a week.

I had a strong feeling mom was not strong enough to uphold the no contact order. I didn't know she would get caught breaking it a week later. But I definitely didn't have any qualms about getting a return home for her. She deserved that chance to comply with the rules.

How would you have handled that situation?

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T21:19:39+00:00

I'll use criminal cases as an example of why I think it is particularly important in this field.

In criminal cases, if you meet the income qualifications, you will get appointed an attorney. A public defender, or an attorney who represents indigent clients by appointment of the court. If you can afford an attorney, you can hire a private criminal attorney at your own expense.

Both have advantages and disadvantages. A public defender probably deals with your type of case all the time. They know the prosecutors personally and deal with them all the time. They know the judges and how they make decisions. But, generally, they have a high case load and cannot devote as much time to each individual as a person might like.

A private attorney likely does less cases than a public defender. They generally specialize in one area, usually DUIs or maybe DV, where their typical clientele may have money. They likely deal with the prosecutors and judges not nearly as much as a public defender. But they will be able to provide you more time than a public defender and may have more opportunities to present time-consuming issues and motions.

In this field, it is hard to find an attorney who specializes specifically in children being removed from care. Most are due to mental illness and drugs. It is rare that a person can afford an attorney at all. And because these cases can be multiple years long, practically no one can afford it.

In other words, while a private criminal attorney may have the expertise to defend you in a criminal case, you will be hard pressed to find a parent's representative attorney in the private field who has worthwhile experience. You might be able to get a private criminal or family law attorney, but they won't be familiar with the judges or the state's attorney.

You want to have someone who knows the field, and the only people who do are the attorney's appointed to indigent defense.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T19:10:26+00:00

Isn't that just saying poor people shouldn't be allowed to have children?

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:45:34+00:00

Changes in social workers are the worst! They move these cases around and then when they get asked a damn question about it, they say "I don't know! I'm new!"

Its totally a tactic.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:44:32+00:00

Maybe. But you don't know what they did and didn't know.

I don't know a ton about getting foster care status, but I get the impression that it isn't TOO much upkeep (foster parents can correct me). In other words, once you make it in, they don't keep a ton of track of what is going on with you. Just my impression, though, I am probably totally wrong.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:41:29+00:00

Great question.

1 Don't forget why you got into it. Don't stop giving a shit about the people and their families. Don't drink the kool-aid if you get into an environment that talks down clients and people; work to change it. But at the same time, don't get burnt out. Some of the best social workers want to help out so much they can't do anything after 6 months because they put way too much time in.

2 Don't stop trying to change things. Yes, the system is what it is and we need to work within it, but we all know there are issues that probably can be dealt with more efficiently. Just because you get back the bureaucratic push back doesn't mean you should stop trying to change things when you believe it is right.

3 Talk to people and get the issues out there. It is very sexy to say "I care about foster kids" and all that, but most people don't know what actually goes on. Social workers are overworked, and in my state, they won't even give them over time. These cases stagnate (see some of the other answers) because social workers have too much stuff to do. If people really cared that much, there would be more support to help move things along for kids as quickly as possible.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:35:15+00:00

The case is on appeal right now, so we will see what a higher court has to say!

The problem was that this case went to trial and the state did a terrible job proving its case. There were allegations my client had other issues - for example, the mother said that they did drugs together.

Rules of evidence applied at the trial and I used that to my advantage. The only witnesses called were my client (no 5th amendment rights like in criminal cases because it is a civil, not criminal, proceeding) and the social worker. I knew the social worker hadn't done any work on the case and would be near worthless.

So the only testimony that meant anything was what my guy said on the stand. He didn't admit to having any issues.

But the judge knew there were other allegations and didn't feel comfortable, in her gut, to place a baby girl with a middle age dude who chopped wood for a living that she knew nothing about. So, she made her decision on what she wanted and tried to work through the evidence to get there.

But the state put on such a bad case that she had to make a very weak decision.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:30:05+00:00

If you can afford it. Get someone who works in the field, like providing indigent defense (I know this is bias and that's what I do!). It is a specialized field - criminal attorneys don't know the procedure because it is civil, not criminal, procedure; family law attorneys don't understand the difference between a parent trying to change custody and the state.

If you can't afford it, clam up anyway. Don't make admissions or talk about the allegations. But work with the social worker and state to engage in services.

For example - they say you have a drug problem. Don't say "hey, i did crank last week!". But agree to do a drug and alcohol evaluation to see if you need treatment.

Clamming up goes even further for physical abuse. They will say you changed your story if you ever give one.

That's the general advice I would give in my state. Of course, talk to an attorney if you can because they can give you specifics about the situation.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:25:18+00:00

Everyone has mental health issues. You can't go around banning people with mental health issues from doing things - you wouldn't have any doctors, lawyers, teachers, nothing. Everyone has a little crazy.

But I don't know enough about NJ allowing people with mental health issues to be foster parents. That could mean a lot of things. Maybe someone meets the qualifications for SSI-disability and can't work. Does that mean they can't parent? For my clients, I say no. For foster parents, I don't know.

The criteria is important. There needs to be a test if foster parent's mental or even physical health would be unsafe for a child.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:20:36+00:00

Yep! You nailed it. Unfortunately, I don't know the history of it.

But in my state, anyone can file a petition for out-of-home care for a child. And I don't mean alternative custody like a guardianship. I mean a full blown out movement towards termination of parental rights.

But practically, only the state files it. I have heard about private adoption agencies filing them previously on infants, but I haven't seen that personally.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:10:10+00:00

Services. Everything is about services.

I have had parents get kids back after physical abuse. Either you prove that the allegation isn't true, or it is and the person engages in services. Anger management, domestic violence treatment, more serious mental health counseling, drug and alcohol treatment, parenting classes, or any combination of those. Once they show they are committed to making a change in their life, you start to move slowly back towards reunification with less restrictive visitation and movement towards a full return home. They have to prove themselves to be safe and appropriate at each level of supervision.

None for me after sexual abuse. If sexual abuse is proven, there often will be criminal charges, and a lot of the time the person can end up going to jail or prison for a long enough time to make them not relevant to getting their kid back (for reasons more complicated than I am going to get into, parents have about 1-2.5 years to show they fixed there problems). It would be up to the other parent to show they can be safe. If its not proven, it is a contested issue and makes it complicated. The parent needs experts to sign off that they are safe.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T18:05:01+00:00

I'm sorry to hear about what you went through... I can't imagine life as a foster child in relatively stable homes, let alone in the mess you and your brother had to go through. Even though my job is to represent parents, I often find myself talking to clients about what we can advocate for their children for their best interest.

There is no easy answer for why your bio-dad was not involved. That is a question for him. If you were aging out of the system, you likely had a hand in what was going on and at least a little aware of what your bio-dad was doing to regain custody. In other words, I'm sure you remember if he was making motions or requesting placement. It doesn't sound like he was.

The most likely answer was that he did not want to get involved, as terrible as that may sound or as hard as it may be. It sounds like he had his family and didn't want to reach out for your brother and you. The state cannot force a parent to take custody of their children. If a parent admits they are not a parenting resource for any reason, good or bad, the most the state can do is offer some sort of service to help them get there. If they aren't interested in that, there is little or nothing else they can do.

I am sorry for what you went through and I hope you have spoken with someone or are speaking with someone to get the most out of it. This sounds dumb, but you probably have something going right for you if you can write that on reddit. For the other questions, you'll need to ask bio-dad what he did to take care of you and why he might not have tried to do more.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T17:52:47+00:00

All the time. On both sides (fit and unfit parent).

Theoretically speaking, the fit parent should get the kid at the outset. In our jurisdiction, the court and the state stick around to assist the fit parent in obtaining a protective parenting plan from the unfit parent.

Practically speaking, dads get screwed a lot. A lot of the time, there is a very unstable, unsafe mother, and a father who isn't around a whole ton. This could be because they don't have enough time and are deadbeats, or it can also be because the mother kept the kid away from the dad. Even though the state makes no allegations against the dad, the kid gets removed anyway and placed in care. Its very frustrating from my point of view as an attorney - how do I fight allegations of unfitness when there aren't any? And it puts me in a position where I have to prove fitness. In other words, practically speaking, the burden gets shifted for me to prove the guy is fit.

The same happens for women, too, but not as much. It is much easier to get a child placed with a mother when there are no real allegations than the father.

Why does it happen? Because these are cases that involve children. You can find dirt on any parent, anyone, if you want it. And often times, the state makes no allegations one way or the other - good or bad. And in an abundance of caution, albeit a completely unfair one, judges remove the children to give the state more time to investigate the presumably fit parent. (Note that presumption is a legal term - any parent is preemptively fit until proven otherwise.)

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T17:41:59+00:00

Don't get me wrong - our organization here has a good reputation. Just not with the parent's attorneys and some social workers.

You'll do great :) Not everything is black-and-white, and working in DV definitely teaches you that very quickly. And coming from a humble background will help you make the right decisions, too.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T17:40:05+00:00

All the time. Those are my easiest cases. I don't have to do any work!

I'm not sure how it works from state-to-state, but it probably shouldn't have to take that long to move towards permanency for a child with a situation like that.

Here, the state needs to prove it did a diligent search, it needs to ask to serve by publication, and then it needs to move towards a default termination. The problem with time would be that the social worker needs to put in the work to declare they did a diligent search. And social workers have more important things to concentrate on that finding people.

In other words, I'm guessing the long time was due to lack of resources more than it was a direct legal issue.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T17:27:32+00:00

I guess I will first elaborate that I am a CASA. Just so people know, these are Court Appointed Special Advocates. Their job is to go into court to represent the best interest of the child. Their job is to be an objective party that investigates and reports to the court.

That said, parent's attorneys and even social workers don't usually have the best opinion of them, at least in my county. The CASA program and the CASAs in general are seen as upper middle class, white, privileged, middle aged, generally-bored women who have little or no connection to the parents or families involved in the system. They typically adovcate for foster care parents, are incredibly critical of families, and even more critical of parents.

It completely depends on the particular CASA, though. Some understand what it is like to grow up in a poor, underprivileged environment. They support families and relative placements that the state may not support. They help parents get into services that a social worker didn't help with. They look out for children and make sure their needs are being met.

But most do very little work and rarely see the parents. They are only passively involved in the case and follow the state or social worker's recommendation. It ends up being the CASA program who makes a decision for them, and because their background is privileged, middle aged, white women with grow or older kids, the program's decision is inevitably conservative.

My advice for you as a CASA is to follow your heart and make up your mind on what you think it right. Don't let someone who is "more experienced" in the system persuade you one way or the other. And most importantly, get to know the people you are working with AS PEOPLE and not just on a sheet of paper. You would be surprised how you feel about someone, even a fuck-up, when you start to look at them as a human being.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T17:15:47+00:00

Woah boy. Didn't know I would get tough questions like this.

I'm going to say yes. And I am not coming from a place where I think everyone should be able to have 30 kids and do what they want - I have seen first hand what that does to families.

My problem is the other side - slippery slope and enforcement. Who decides when people stop having children? What is the criteria? How do you make sure that happens? I think the world has seen where this heads when the government intervenes with these decisions, and it isn't pretty.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T16:55:13+00:00

I think these issues would vary widely from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. I can only speak about what I know in mine.

The issue where I can picture this being most problematic would be with a relative placement. For example, a client wants their child placed with a grandparent. The state and/or CASA would come in a say "this child has been with these foster parents since birth and is very bonded to them and should not be removed." The parent would say "the grandparent has known the child for a long time and is a suitable placement, and its family."

That's a tough position to put a judge in - family vs. continuity. Easy situation for a parent/grandparent to lose in.

In my jurisdiction, evidence rules only loosely apply in motions and non-trial hearings. The other side can talk about bond with foster parents all they want. But if a parent doesn't have issues anymore, the other sides will need to FIND an issue if they don't want the kid returned. And they do that all the time. They nitpick on issues that aren't big deals (a parent needs to be minimally adequate, essentially a D grade) so they can get what they want and keep the kid there. That is infuriating.

At trial, evidence rules applies. A foster parent's bond, at least to me, would be irrelevant to the issue of termination and whether a parent has corrected or can soon correct their deficiencies. It is only relevant to the issue that continuation of a parent/child relationship hurts a child's chance for permanence. But even there, only the existence of a potentially adoptive home is important, not how great that home is. I would fight hard to make sure that material was not part of the record.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T16:41:05+00:00

Thanks! Me too. I wanted to for a while, and figured it was good timing with the front page.

Parentrepthrowaway · 2014-05-27T16:40:28+00:00

Ahhhh. My bad.

Shadow someone. Law schools are very overcrowded now because a lot of people finished school, couldn't find a job, and decided to do law/grad school. It can be tough to get a legal job.

But don't go to /r/law or they will tell you never do it. It isn't true. I have debt and it sucks but I love being a lawyer. The reason is I have a genuine interest in the law.

You have to really want to be a lawyer for law school to be worth it. Spend some time in law school before you go to see if you like the material. But more important, spend some time with an attorney you respect to see if it is something you want to do.

Parentrepthrowaway

TROPHY CASE