Child Support Enforcement in Disruptions

We wanted to share this NACAC factsheet with our readers. See here.

Their arguments for asking agencies NOT to file lawsuits for child suppor against FOSTER parents (no mention of international adoptive parents) are as follows:

“Arguments Against Charging the Adoptive Family With Child Support Payments

Federal policies clearly state that adoptive parents should not be forced to lower their standard of living to bring a special needs child into their life (Section 8.2A.2 of the Child Welfare Policy Manual). Instead, subsidy programs were created (and continue to exist) to eliminate the disincentives to adopting children with special needs.

Families who adopt children with special needs save the system money since adoption subsidy payments are considerably lower than the monthly and administrative costs of foster care. If a child must return to the system years after finalization, the adoptive parents have saved the state for the time that child was able to live in a family setting. If the family had not done so, the costs of keeping the child in care, whether in traditional foster care or an institutional setting, would be significantly greater.

When children return to the system years after the adoption finalization and families are financially penalized, what message does this send to these parents who are a potential resource for waiting children and to other foster or prospective adoptive families in the state?

Due to increased attention to state budgetary cut backs, parents are already cautious about expecting the state agency to keep their promises and provide the on-going funding and services necessary to maintain children with special needs in adoptive homes. When parents learn that states have charged adoptive families with child support payments, state agencies will lose the best resources they have for their waiting children—experienced foster/adoptive families.

For adoptive parents, there are additional costs associated with out of home care than many people realize. These vary from situation to situation and state to state. Costs will usually be higher for parents whose children are in a private placement than for those who are in temporary state agency custody, but might include:

• legal costs associated with court-ordered placement for the child;
• cost of a temporary emergency stay at a children’s shelter or acute care wards while awaiting admission to regional treatment centers;
•  lost hours at work due to the time demands of paperwork and admissions procedures;
• preparing the child for admission which often requires a full physical exam and report, fresh psychological and educational testing, and a wardrobe with specific required items;
• initial transportation and visitation costs;
• clothing and shoes;
• typical expenses associated with birthdays and holidays;
• long distance phone calls;
• trips and lost work time for required family therapy sessions;
• charges related to property damaged, destroyed, or stolen by the child; and
• tuition (in some cases) or fees for continued treatment after Medicaid has been maxed out.”

REFORM Puzzle Piece