e-mail
My friend, Indy, posted the link to this article over on the Adoption.com Special Needs Forum. The article is titled “For Love or Money?” It is generating quite a bit of feedback, both on the forum, and on the website that the story is on.
I am steaming mad. It is yet another story of how parents supposedly adopt children for the HUGE monthly stipends, and how they’re getting rich off of it.
The story is prompted by a couple of other stories of adoptive parents abusing their children.
I will try to stay off my soap box, but I am sick of the criticism of foster and adoptive parents who are working with tough kids, and of accusations that we only do it for money. If one adoptive family has problems, or is accused of abuse, ALL adoptive and foster parents have problems. We are one large, horrible group.
When a birth parent is accused of abuse, are ALL birth parents criticized? NO! So why is it different with foster and adoptive parents? Yes, we take the children who have already been abused and neglected, and it’s our job to keep them safe. What the articles don’t say is that most families have to beg and plead for services.
The article and the responses say that all medical expenses are covered by medical assistance. I don’t know about the rest of you, but the professionals I have found that understand adoption and trauma issues don’t accept medical assistance. I speak to plenty of parents that have the same problem. Find a good attachment therapist or psychiatrist that accepts medical assistance. They don’t, because the amount they get reimbursed doesn’t come close to covering their costs.
The article also highlights the top 10 families in Indiana that are receiving subsidies, their names, and how much they receive. They are some staggering amounts. The top family has received $703,000 in the past 4 years. What it does not say is how many kids are in the family, or what issues they are dealing with. The public is just supposed to be outraged that their tax dollars are going to this family.
However, if you asked someone from the public to live with the kids the article sites as “normal”, do you think they would willingly do it? How long do you think it would last? Would they do it for no money? How long would they survive with no services?
Can anyone realistically think that a child can go through what our kids have been through with no effects at all? Adults don’t live through abuse and neglect with no effects. I hear people say that children are resilient. Yes, they are, but everyone has a breaking point. Unfortunately, our kids are forced to find out what that breaking point is.
There is also the criticism of large families. One response questions whether or not it’s good to have so many “troubled” children living together in one house.
Then there is the opening paragraph in the article.
Taking a troubled child from state custody into their homes is a spiritual calling for a handful of Hoosiers, such as Betty Bledsoe, who is raising a brood of 10 — two of her own kids and eight adopted children.
Apparently the 8 adopted children are not hers. I wonder who they call for in the middle of the night when they have nightmares of their previous abuse? I bet they call her Mom.
I have tough kids. My love for them can not be measured in dollars. When we first adopted Sammy, we assumed the subsidy would cease when his adoption was finalized, and we initially wanted to turn down it down. Our worker convinced us to keep it. Boy, are we glad we did. Without it, we’d be in a bad place, and having to make some tough choices like clothes or food.
I think that some of the resentment and critisim might stem from our horrible health care system. I have several friends who are “biological” parents of challenging children. They do not qualify for assistance of any kind to help them with treatment for their children. They sometimes joke (wryly) that the only way that they can get treatment for their children is to have them taken away from them and put into foster care.
I blame our antiquated health care system.
Janet
Children are our future? And the least paying full time jobs are those jobs where someone is caring/teaching a child that is not biologically theirs (teachers, day care workers, foster care parents & adoptive parents). Interesting where our nation chooses to pour money…. Iraq.
How come taxpayers are outraged about this reality? Elaine
We also get a “subsidy” for our fost/adopted child. We did not expect it to continue beyond foster care either! However, the reason for these subsidies is quite valid. If families for children like the one one we adopted could not be found, it would cost the states far more to care for them. The money makes the decision easier for a lot of families. We used to have to take our daughter to Dr. appointments 4-5 hours away as often as twice a week. There are months when I don’t know how we could have afforded the gas or food for all those trips. Not to mention medications not covered by insurance and other items.
Wow, and “I am the Natural Mother” and I wanted nothing more than to have those worries and love my children.
And the STATE said that one was special needs because she had a hearing aid, and one for braces in her feet.
And the state gave my children to a couple, who adopted my 2 girls plus 3 more, And now they have fostered another child.
No Offense but, “Birthfamilies” do get all criticized. This is at least in Illinois.
And as birthfamilies we don’t get the luxury of stipends, etc.
We are forced with choices between food and clothes.
We don’t get it COVERED by anyone.
No offense I am sure there are many with good hearts. But, out here there are so many scam artists. It is quite sad.