FacePalm Friday

“Deja” was two years old in 1997 when I first learned about her, living in the Baltimore area with a foster mother and foster siblings. Today, I don’t know if I want her to know about her would-be family or not. What would she think?

What would it mean to her that I still pray she has the same kind of home my husband and I would have given her? That she would have two older brothers to adore her, even though back then one of them said, “I don’t see why we need a sister?” That an extended family of aunts, uncles and cousins had been waiting for her?

That May, our family finished the six-month One Church, One Child adoption program at a Howard County church. Almost immediately our adoption counselor set up an appointment with Maryland social services. I don’t remember if it was Baltimore or Baltimore County.

My husband and I sat for a few hours going through the file of a little girl a social worker thought would be a good match for us. Her biological mother was petite and had my coloring. “She looks like me when I was a toddler. See the fuzzy light-brown hair?” I told my husband.

Sometimes people tell you more than they should, and we were told that the white foster mother was always complaining about “Deja.” They said she exaggerated stories about the child not eating, or not speaking, or crying a lot, all for the additional money that she would get if “Deja” were declared a “special needs” child.

Both of the toddler’s parents had been caught up in the social services and the justice system and neither they nor their families could take the child. The father’s family might be interested if they could take her as a foster child, I was told. But adoption is the ideal and they were giving her to us.

On the morning I was to meet “Deja” I got a call from my adoption counselor telling me that her foster mother had just decided that she would adopt “Deja.” Apologetically, she said some foster parents do this to buy time, and our adoption plans might still go through, but my visit was abruptly cancelled.

From then on, I could not reach the social worker nor my adoption counselor, who had moved on to a new job. No one could, or would tell me what was happening to “Deja.” After about six months, someone in a government office found our family’s approved adoption application, but said it had expired.

The focus of this year’s National Adoption Month is on the 120,000 children in foster care waiting to be adopted. Reports of happy, wonderful children and their delighted new families have become a tradition this time of year as judges in public ceremonies declare their adoptions final. I’m glad that so many families’ adoption stories have happy endings (or happy beginnings, really).

In any case, I also blame myself that “Deja” is not part of my family. While all of the adoption drama was going on back then, my mother suffered two heart attacks, and after awhile it was just too hard to keep pressing the adoption issue.

I often think about “Deja.” If she sees herself in this story will she want to contact me? My email is oldschoollessons@gmail.com .”

Blogging We’re always looking for volunteer or guest bloggers with an authoritative voice on adoption topics, such as international adoption, foster care, unplanned pregnancy, search and reunion etc. for AdoptionBlogs.com. This may be the perfect time to voice your adoption experiences and share with our community!

Highlighted Articles Informing Loved Ones of a Pending Adoption

(6)Attorney: Children Services’ practices prevent adoptions aka Lawyer moans about children who are not legally-free and the clients who want to adopt them.

“Approximately two years ago, I became aware that the board was taking a position in its dependency, neglect and abuse court caseload that left children who were being permanently removed from the care of their biological parents in the position of never being able to be adopted by the alternate caregivers who had taken on the emotional, legal and financial responsibility for their care,” Cathy Goldman said in a letter to county commissioners.

Goldman, who has practiced family law for 30 years and formerly served as a juvenile court magistrate, said Children Services will not seek permanent custody — thereby terminating parental rights — of a child unless it previously had temporary custody.

“If you’re an aunt or an uncle, or brother or sister, or third party, that kid is never going to get adopted unless the biological parents consent,” Goldman said. “The goal for kids is permanency. Adoption is the best-case scenario for any child.”

–Oh, really?

Children Services officials, after granting two interviews lasting nearly two hours to the News Journal, asked to have all their comments withdrawn without explanation.

“We have no comment as to why we want our remarks withdrawn,” spokesman Carl Hunnell said in an email.

–Methinks they agreed to a meeting and then realized they were speaking with a nut.

The local agency has a defender in Crystal Ward Allen, executive director of the Public Children Services Association of Ohio. She said Children Services received a national award for adoption excellence.

“Richland County is known for not letting kids linger in foster care,” Ward Allen said. “They’re a model for other agencies. I’ve got a high level of respect for them.”

Goldman said the policy affected one of her former clients.

“The board’s attorneys were never able to explain the reason for this policy, and as it was controlling the outcome of a case I was involved with, I subpoenaed four board members and (Executive Director) Randy Parker for a deposition in an attempt to understand and hopefully rebut their reasoning in that case and for other similarly situated families,” Goldman said.

Goldman took a deposition from Parker in June 2010.

“He testified that the reason for the policy was that he did not think the board had the legal authority to take the action that would enable adoptions,” she said.

Goldman said she told Parker he was misinformed and offered to educate him on the issue. She said he never took her up on her offer.

–So her client who wanted to adopt a child, but couldn’t because the child wasn’t legally free, hired her to go after their policy. Gee, wonder why they didn’t want her offer?

According to the Ohio Administrative Code, if a child cannot remain in his or her home, Children Services “shall explore both maternal and paternal relatives regarding their willingness and ability to assume temporary custody or guardianship of the child. Unless it is not in the child’s best interest, (the agency) shall explore placement with a non-custodial parent before considering other relatives.”

Ward Allen said an agency’s top priority is to make sure of the child’s health and safety. The goal is to keep children with their parents, she said.

“(An agency) has to use reasonable effort to prevent out-of-home placement and/or to reunify children with their parents,” Ward Allen said. “The second thing is to try to keep them in their home.

“We’ll only hold an out-of-home placement for a temporary period. After 12 months, we have to go to court with a recommendation for permanency.”

Ward Allen said the timeline can be extended for up to a year if the parents are “working hard.”

Types of custody

If a judge awards temporary custody to an agency or person, the situation has to be reviewed every six months.

“Nobody could approve adoption without parental permission,” Ward Allen said.

In legal custody, the caregiver has rights to raise the child. Ward Allen said the arrangement is intended to be permanent.

“It gives a sense of stability,” she said. “(Legal custody) is not dependent on the whims of the birth parents.”

At the same time, the birth parents retain some rights and can have visitation. The custodian does not have the right to place the child up for adoption, and the child maintains inheritance rights.

-I am not sure what this is? Is this available in other states?

“In some cases, that’s perfectly fine,” Goldman said. “In some (when the caretakers want to adopt), it’s not.”

–Note: it’s not ok when caregivers want to adopt

Goldman said birth parents will opt for the legal custody deal “99 percent of the time” because they retain residual rights. She said the arrangement also can’t be used against the birth parents with another child.

With permanent custody, all parental rights are terminated. A judge can approve adoption without consulting the birth parents.

“It’s a very, very hostile legal process,” Ward Allen said. “It is very laborious and time-consuming. It makes an orphan of the child.”

Goldman contends Children Services tries to avoid such cases.

–Well, I wonder why?

“I have to say it is an unwillingness, and I think you have to call it laziness,” she said. “They just won’t take on the hard case.

“The effect is that very young children are being placed in the care of third parties who will never be able to adopt them. It will be very difficult, if not impossible, for the child to be adopted.”

–And why is this necessarily a bad thing??

Board meeting

Goldman, who describes herself as a friend of the agency, took her concerns to the Children Services board in October. She met with a subcommittee for 15 minutes but did not finish her presentation.

Goldman was not on the agenda for the regular board session but stayed to continue the discussion. She was denied the chance to address the full board.

On Nov. 7, the family law committee of the county bar association requested to meet with the board about the adoption issue and other concerns. Twenty-five attorneys signed a letter addressed to board President Nancy Joyce.

Nearly three weeks later, a meeting has not been scheduled.

-If it were my board I wouldn’t rush to schedule a meeting with these lawyers either.

(7)Hat tip to a reader who forwarded this blog http://hopeforsharon.blogspot.com/2011/11/messy-parts-of-adoption.html  A PAP who is trying to stand in solidarity with the blogger we profiled here

“I tried a few times to have a rational discussion with a few of the adult adoptees who are angry and posting on the blogs. I do realize that they have carried this pain and been dealing with this topic much longer than I have. So they, understandably, come at me with some preconceived notions. I get that, but it doesn’t make it right.”

Our reader’s comment: ” I just don’t get how/why PAPs react with such hostility to advice provided by actual adult adoptees. *sigh*”

Neither do we. We also find all of the “paperwork” issues and child identification procedure to be suspect. These children were not available by the country yet as HIV was not on the list of special needs. Reece’s listed them anyway and these people signed up to adopt them.

Some Events on the timeline:
3/11/2011-Mailed homestudy application
3/14/2011-Mailed commitment to Reece’s Rainbow
3/18/2011-Officially committed to Sharon
3/21/2011-First appointment with Villa Hope (Begin the paper chase)
5/20/2011-Got USCIS approval!!!
5/24/2011-Mailed dossier to EE!!
5/26/2011-Dossier arrived in EE!!
6/15/2011-Our girls’ country announces it will shut down adoptions for 3 months beginning July 11.
7/8/2011-Learned that Our girls’ country will stay open for special needs adoptions. But our girl’s needs are not, yet on the list.
7/30/2011-Learned that our girls’ country is working to expand the list of special needs.
8/12/2011-Issued an SDA appointment of 8/18/2011 and mailed petition to postpone till HIV is added to the list of special needs.
9/30-2011-Became fully funded!
10/11/2011-The girls’ country does not reopen and has not amended the special needs list.
11/17/2011-We learn that the transition to the new adoption ministry has taken place, and will start issuing travel dates soon, but still no list.
11/24/2011-Country starts issuing travel dates again for children over 5, but still no list
11/28/2011-mailed petition to go ahead and adopt “Sharon” without her sister in hopes that the special needs list will be released before court
12/1/2011-petition rejected
12/2/2011-sent second petition”