Permanancy in Foster Care

*My usual disclaimer...please read the title and note that I'm referring totally to foster care adoption here. So no panties in a twist, please.

I've been thinking about this for quite some time. I've read on several blogs of mothers of loss and adoptees that adoption should just be done away with completely. They feel a child who can't be cared for by his/her parents should go to extended family. I don't disagree with this at all in theory. I think that's the best case scenario. However, especially when we are dealing with the reality of TRUE fostercare cases (i.e. abuse or neglect and not youth or poverty), that just often isn't an option. For example, extended family members were looked at in all four of my boys' cases and it just wouldn't have worked out. In fact two of the boys WERE placed with extended family. One of them was "voluntarily" returned to care because the family member "couldn't handle him" and the other was removed due to severe abuse and neglect at the hands of the family member. I'll grant that this is a grossly small sample but still rather telling just the same.

Ok. I don't think there's anyone who can dispute that sometimes family is NOT an option. So what then? I truly believe that children need a sense of belonging, of permanacy. I can't imagine not knowing when you get up in the morning if you'll be going to sleep in the same bed that night. Not to mention what the feeling that no one wants you must do to a person's self-esteem. So I guess that means remaining in care isn't such a great choice. Actually, I think foster care should only be used while reunification is being attempted or until an appropriate permanent situation can be found if reunification fails.

So, next? Maybe permanent legal guardianship? I think that's an option but I'm not sure that's better or worse than legal adoption. In some cases, the kids might need to KNOW that their parents' rights have been terminated and there's no chance they'll be returning to that situation. Jay and Logan did. They were literally in pretty serious danger while with their parents. They are still scared of them, to the point of having nightmares that they come to kill us or take them. Also, some kids might need the unity of having the same last name to get a sense of belonging to their new family. I know I gave all four of my sons the choice and they all CHOSE to change or add my last name to theirs. Two of them kept their names completely the same and just added mine. The other two dropped their original last name entirely. Those same two actually changed more as well...Jay changed his name from Julian to Jay (our family nickname for him) and Cory changed his middle name. They both ASKED to make those changes. I didn't even suggest them in either case. I also know being officially adopted has helped them all to know that they are here with a family that loves and wants them forever. They don't have to wake up tomorrow and wonder where they'll be moved to next. I'm not sure about this last point (if anyone knows please feel free to leave a comment about this) so I may do some research on it and post more about it later. Does the child in a legal guardianship have the same rights that a legally recognized child of that guardian would have? Does that leave a child in that situation without parents or a family when he/she becomes a legal adult? Legal guardianship stops at 18 or 21, right? So who does that leave for a person whose parents' rights were terminated by the court due to abuse/neglect so that the child could have permanancy? Maybe this wouldn't be a big deal to most but I just can't imagine having no legally recognized parents.

I know that there are adoptees who felt that they couldn't be themselves growing up in a family they weren't genetically linked to. My first response to this is...SHAME ON ANY FAMILIES that caused a child to feel that way! I've posted before about "mini-me's" and expecting a child to be like the parents. That's just wrong in ANY family, whether biological or adopted. "Fitting in" should be a matter of being loved for who you are, not changing yourself to be like others just to gain acceptance. However, I think adoptive parents should accept that the losses caused by adoption might lead to these feelings and they should be prepared to help their children through this while they're growing up. Their differences should be accepted, even celebrated, and original families/heritage should be respected.

I'll admit I'm just a mom with a blog. I'm not an expert with all the answers but I just can't see how making my boys a permanent, legal part of my family is a bad thing as long as I don't negate their original families in the process. I know some will say changing their last name does that but like I said it was their choice and for me it was about including them in my family not getting rid of their original family.