procedure
Can a foster parent ‘over-advocate’ for their foster child?
30/12/2009 23:57
We follow a number of online forums and this came up over at www.fostercarecentral.com. A carer posted that they’d been told they ‘over-advocated’ for their foster child.
Over-advocate? That seems to be legal-speak creeping into the child services area. We are sure we could find some plain english expressions that are much clearer and, quite frankly, a whole lot more honest.
‘An advocate is someone who speaks on behalf of another person, especially in a legal context. … Implicit in the concept is the notion that the represented lacks the knowledge, skill, ability, or standing to speak for themselves.’ (Wikipedia)
So let’s be honest and decipher what that term might mean. As a foster parent, you attend case conferences, and talk with social workers on behalf of your foster child. Depending on their age or their circumstances they might lack the knowledge, skill, ability, maturity or capability to speak on their own behalf.
Can a carer ‘over-speak’, or ‘over-represent’? Are we saying more than we should?
We’d love to hear an honest debate on this one. We’d like to ask the social workers whether they are saying that we aren’t educated or qualified or experienced enough to make a contribution to the discussion about the child’s needs?
Or are they saying that we simply don’t have the right to contribute? Is our role to provide a home and care but leave the decision making to the ‘system’?
Sadly, this sounds like a turf war.
If the social welfare profession is so precious that outspoken foster parents cause grief, then we really need an overhaul. Business deals with outspoken, opinionated customers and shareholders all the time. We judge their contribution according to their talents, but we don’t – and can’t – prevent them from having their say.
We’ve had workers who spent a great deal of energy telling us, with diminishing degrees of politeness, to shut up and get back in our box. We had a role to play, designated by the system, and they were thoroughly annoyed that we didn’t stick to the script.
But interestingly, it’s our willingness to step outside ‘our role’ that sees us maintaining contact with children formerly in our care, long after they have become adults. It’s why we stepped up to help them ‘age out’ of foster care (emotionally, financially and with life skills), when the system, previous carers, and all those passionate social workers had left the scene.
If we applied some innovative thinking to the issue, then maybe the passion with which carers might speak on behalf of a child is a good thing? Business has long recognised that divergent viewpoints and passionate debate, if managed well, drive much better results.
So it gets down to frontline training. In all fairness we believe social workers have a large range of stakeholders to deal with – from authorities, to birth families, to agencies, to carers and beyond. But there are other professions that deal with such a range. The ability to manage people is not taught at university (and if anyone tells you it was, or is, they are lying). It is learned on the job, over many years, and requires both an interest in people and a willingness to be self-aware. Too often the fundamental skill that underpins both of those elements – listening – is absent.
So, listen up. We’ll over-advocate for the Camper as long as we can breathe.
(If you are a carer about to provide care, you might like to print these bullet points out, amend or add to them to reflect what you think you bring to the placements, and give them to your worker.)
And if doing any of that is a challenge, we suggest a great deal more training is needed. We’re happy to assist.
Over-advocate? That seems to be legal-speak creeping into the child services area. We are sure we could find some plain english expressions that are much clearer and, quite frankly, a whole lot more honest.
‘An advocate is someone who speaks on behalf of another person, especially in a legal context. … Implicit in the concept is the notion that the represented lacks the knowledge, skill, ability, or standing to speak for themselves.’ (Wikipedia)
So let’s be honest and decipher what that term might mean. As a foster parent, you attend case conferences, and talk with social workers on behalf of your foster child. Depending on their age or their circumstances they might lack the knowledge, skill, ability, maturity or capability to speak on their own behalf.
Can a carer ‘over-speak’, or ‘over-represent’? Are we saying more than we should?
We’d love to hear an honest debate on this one. We’d like to ask the social workers whether they are saying that we aren’t educated or qualified or experienced enough to make a contribution to the discussion about the child’s needs?
Or are they saying that we simply don’t have the right to contribute? Is our role to provide a home and care but leave the decision making to the ‘system’?
Sadly, this sounds like a turf war.
If the social welfare profession is so precious that outspoken foster parents cause grief, then we really need an overhaul. Business deals with outspoken, opinionated customers and shareholders all the time. We judge their contribution according to their talents, but we don’t – and can’t – prevent them from having their say.
We’ve had workers who spent a great deal of energy telling us, with diminishing degrees of politeness, to shut up and get back in our box. We had a role to play, designated by the system, and they were thoroughly annoyed that we didn’t stick to the script.
But interestingly, it’s our willingness to step outside ‘our role’ that sees us maintaining contact with children formerly in our care, long after they have become adults. It’s why we stepped up to help them ‘age out’ of foster care (emotionally, financially and with life skills), when the system, previous carers, and all those passionate social workers had left the scene.
If we applied some innovative thinking to the issue, then maybe the passion with which carers might speak on behalf of a child is a good thing? Business has long recognised that divergent viewpoints and passionate debate, if managed well, drive much better results.
So it gets down to frontline training. In all fairness we believe social workers have a large range of stakeholders to deal with – from authorities, to birth families, to agencies, to carers and beyond. But there are other professions that deal with such a range. The ability to manage people is not taught at university (and if anyone tells you it was, or is, they are lying). It is learned on the job, over many years, and requires both an interest in people and a willingness to be self-aware. Too often the fundamental skill that underpins both of those elements – listening – is absent.
So, listen up. We’ll over-advocate for the Camper as long as we can breathe.
(If you are a carer about to provide care, you might like to print these bullet points out, amend or add to them to reflect what you think you bring to the placements, and give them to your worker.)
- We will challenge you on decisions, and we will give you our well thought out opinion on what we see the child going through.
- We will raise issues and suggest decisions that need to be made for you to give us feedback on.
- We will tell you politely if we think you are wrong, and we will become less polite if you ignore us.
- We will expect you to be skilled enough to see the love/compassion we have for this child and understand the depth of our care for the child.
- As time goes by we will expect you to be skilled enough to see the love this child has for us, or the reliance they place on us, and take that into account.
- We don’t accept there is any ‘mark’ to overstep so we will have no tolerance for you complaining, overtly or covertly, about us doing that.
- We will expect that you, as the professional you hold yourself out to be, will be able to assess us and judge us and manage us and collaborate with us.
And if doing any of that is a challenge, we suggest a great deal more training is needed. We’re happy to assist.
|
Agencies' neglect fatal for Ebony
07/10/2009 23:57
There are a few circumstances in life where one mistake can be fatal. But in most cases, adults are usually involved. Adults choose to put themselves at risk.
Small children don’t choose to put themselves at risk.
Not in relation to the fundamentals – like love, family, care, learning. They rely on adults to protect them. They rely first on their parents. And our child protection system is set up to monitor, and manage, when parents fail. We expect it to work. But if the parents fail, and then the system fails, a child can die.
So what an absolute tragedy to read about a child in New South Wales who starved to death while in the care of her parents. No child should go through what Ebony went through. If ‘the system’ is the last line of defence, then it’s a huge responsibility for the people who work in ‘the system’.
We know when software fails. We know when a company fails. We know when some appliance fails. Do we know when a parent fails? You don’t just get a blue computer screen. In many cases it is not just one event that makes it obvious you have a #parentfail.
But when the risk of not acting is a child’s life, you may ask why on earth someone didn’t do something?
One of the newspaper reports stated that DoCs had ‘failed to convince the Children's Court to remove Ebony and her two older sisters from their parents, despite the fact Ebony's younger sister had been removed’. So the ‘system’ had a ‘fail’ at what appears in hindsight to have been the right course of action? Why?
The Ombudsman concluded that Ebony’s case "illustrates very clearly what can go wrong for children when agencies fail to work effectively, fail to work together and fail to take shared responsibility for the care and protection of children".
No kidding.
Small children don’t choose to put themselves at risk.
Not in relation to the fundamentals – like love, family, care, learning. They rely on adults to protect them. They rely first on their parents. And our child protection system is set up to monitor, and manage, when parents fail. We expect it to work. But if the parents fail, and then the system fails, a child can die.
So what an absolute tragedy to read about a child in New South Wales who starved to death while in the care of her parents. No child should go through what Ebony went through. If ‘the system’ is the last line of defence, then it’s a huge responsibility for the people who work in ‘the system’.
We know when software fails. We know when a company fails. We know when some appliance fails. Do we know when a parent fails? You don’t just get a blue computer screen. In many cases it is not just one event that makes it obvious you have a #parentfail.
But when the risk of not acting is a child’s life, you may ask why on earth someone didn’t do something?
- Is it because the online forums are full of condemnation at the apparent ease with which we remove children from biological parents who don’t care properly for them?
- Is it because we hear from children who have been in care that they have never managed to deal with, or been given the support to cope with, being removed from their birth parents?
- Is it because psychologists have studies that tell us that even a poor biological family is better than removing a child from them?
- Is it because the ideology favours family support and keeping a family together, no matter what?
- Is it because none of the ‘systems’ or agencies that look out for a child in NSW are linked?
- Is it because no one is able to see the complete picture?
- Is it because worker turnover meant there was never one worker with the family history?
- Is it because the processes in the main organisation charged with the responsibilities for children at risk simply don’t work?
One of the newspaper reports stated that DoCs had ‘failed to convince the Children's Court to remove Ebony and her two older sisters from their parents, despite the fact Ebony's younger sister had been removed’. So the ‘system’ had a ‘fail’ at what appears in hindsight to have been the right course of action? Why?
The Ombudsman concluded that Ebony’s case "illustrates very clearly what can go wrong for children when agencies fail to work effectively, fail to work together and fail to take shared responsibility for the care and protection of children".
No kidding.
- Agencies failing to work effectively means process improvement is required.
- Agencies failing to work together means no links (technical or personal), no reason to share and no habit of collaboration. Links need to be built and people need to be trained in collaborating. Having worked with social workers who didn’t even like collaborating with us, we suspect there’s a cultural issue to address in some sectors as well.
- Shared responsibility? That means all of us. Courts, system and community. This isn’t just a DoCS problem.
Details on children kept from foster carers
01/10/2009 23:01
‘Thousands of foster carers are welcoming children into their homes without being given the full facts about the children’s past, including whether they were victims of abuse’.
We put the link to this Times Online (UK) article on Twitter, and quickly got a response:
11:25pm, Sep 17 from Web
feeling this first hand
The report came from Fostering Network, which represents 43,000 carers in Britain. A couple of court rulings had opened the door for local authorities to be sued if they didn’t meet their duty of care to foster families.
The statistics were blunt – more than 51% of carers in the UK say that they have been given inadequate information about a child in their care, which has put themselves, their own children and even the foster child at risk. A full 30% weren’t told about the child’s medical requirements, 50% were not informed about a history of abuse, and 75% said that they were not made aware of the child’s general behaviour.
This is not an uncommon problem. In the early years it may be critical to understanding the child’s behaviour and health, and as they get older it may be essential to help them understand their past and their birth family.
When the turnover of workers is high (average we’ve heard for DoCS in Oz is about a year, and even in private agencies it runs at about 2 years), and if a child has moved placements a great deal, who on earth has any history for this child?
Oh, that’s right, the system does. (Btw, this is why life story work, however you may do that, is critical for these kids. More on that later.)
So what’s the problem with getting the right information to carers? The case file on a child who comes into your care may:
Why can’t carers see the child’s files, you might ask? We actually don’t think that’s a good idea. There are privacy issues relating to information in there about people other than the child. Carers need to retain some objectivity about birth parents and families. You need a good relationship with them for the child’s sake, and reading what might be a troubled history, that you will make a judgement on, might actually stop you doing that.
What needs to happen is for the files to be reproduced for the carers, with all the facts relevant to the child, but with none of the other stuff.
When the general consensus seems to be that many of our workers are overloaded, it’s not surprising that paperwork isn’t their first priority.
The people to do, what would essentially be a ‘sifting’ job, need to understand privacy, and they need to understand which facts are relevant to the child’s history. So why not find some lawyers, or social workers, who want to work part time? Get them in, make them sign a confidentiality agreement, and get them at it.
We think some rigour needs to be directed at solving these problems. Outsourcing a task is common in business, provided risk and privacy is managed well.
And as the survey shows, there is real risk to the foster family and the child if information is not forthcoming. ‘Flying blind’ can be fun sometimes, but not for a foster carer struggling to understand, manage and care for a small person.
We put the link to this Times Online (UK) article on Twitter, and quickly got a response:
11:25pm, Sep 17 from Web
feeling this first hand
The report came from Fostering Network, which represents 43,000 carers in Britain. A couple of court rulings had opened the door for local authorities to be sued if they didn’t meet their duty of care to foster families.
The statistics were blunt – more than 51% of carers in the UK say that they have been given inadequate information about a child in their care, which has put themselves, their own children and even the foster child at risk. A full 30% weren’t told about the child’s medical requirements, 50% were not informed about a history of abuse, and 75% said that they were not made aware of the child’s general behaviour.
This is not an uncommon problem. In the early years it may be critical to understanding the child’s behaviour and health, and as they get older it may be essential to help them understand their past and their birth family.
When the turnover of workers is high (average we’ve heard for DoCS in Oz is about a year, and even in private agencies it runs at about 2 years), and if a child has moved placements a great deal, who on earth has any history for this child?
Oh, that’s right, the system does. (Btw, this is why life story work, however you may do that, is critical for these kids. More on that later.)
So what’s the problem with getting the right information to carers? The case file on a child who comes into your care may:
- Be very large
- Contain information that is not relevant to the child in your care (for example information about birth family)
- Contain highly sensitive, prejudicial or private information about someone other than your foster child,
- Be very large – oh, we said that.
Why can’t carers see the child’s files, you might ask? We actually don’t think that’s a good idea. There are privacy issues relating to information in there about people other than the child. Carers need to retain some objectivity about birth parents and families. You need a good relationship with them for the child’s sake, and reading what might be a troubled history, that you will make a judgement on, might actually stop you doing that.
What needs to happen is for the files to be reproduced for the carers, with all the facts relevant to the child, but with none of the other stuff.
When the general consensus seems to be that many of our workers are overloaded, it’s not surprising that paperwork isn’t their first priority.
The people to do, what would essentially be a ‘sifting’ job, need to understand privacy, and they need to understand which facts are relevant to the child’s history. So why not find some lawyers, or social workers, who want to work part time? Get them in, make them sign a confidentiality agreement, and get them at it.
We think some rigour needs to be directed at solving these problems. Outsourcing a task is common in business, provided risk and privacy is managed well.
And as the survey shows, there is real risk to the foster family and the child if information is not forthcoming. ‘Flying blind’ can be fun sometimes, but not for a foster carer struggling to understand, manage and care for a small person.
Reporting more detail on children in care?
28/04/2009 17:20
This came from Caroline Overington (#overingtonc) via Twitter. The full article is called The girl in the window, and recounts, in quite astonishing detail, the story of a 9 year old Florida girl.
She was so neglected and abused in her birth family that she now suffers developmental delay of the most extreme, fundamental kind. She has been adopted by a family who are trying to mend what they can. The article discloses a great deal of personal information about the child and her birth family, and a lot of detail on what the child experienced.
It should be compulsory reading for anyone who thinks they have an informed opinion on children’s services.
So, why can’t Overington and other responsible journos report this type of story, at this level of detail, in Australia?
Should we be able to report this type of story at this level of detail?
How can you work to a solution when no one is able to openly discuss the problem?
Can you educate all the people involved when the facts remain hidden?
Can you bring struggling parents to some degree of self-awareness if they never hear other stories they might identify with?
Can you report at this level of detail and still protect people’s privacy, particularly the children’s?
Perhaps it is time for a new approach.
Just today it was reported that ’Australian health and welfare agencies … formed a taskforce to combat increasing numbers of child abuse and neglect, which reached 55,000 cases last year’.
With notifications for alleged child abuse and neglect almost tripling in Australia between 1999 and 2007, the problem isn’t being solved by existing methods.
So maybe the time has come to give some committed, experienced, responsible journos the green light to start reporting.
Is it too easy to consider it ‘someone else’s problem’ if we don’t get too close to it?
When do we listen to the children?
18/04/2009 21:08
Well done to Jenny Brockie and her team for the Insight program on Kids on Divorce.
While we think it is one of the most thought-provoking shows on the box, sometimes the dive is way too shallow. Just when you think the issue is finally open, the show finishes. And presenting one perspective, while powerful, can leave a viewer wondering what the other ‘side’ is. Some of the comments on the website suggest that there is another perspective.
But Brockie and Co should be giving lessons, for they are doing what too many institutions, and individuals, have failed to do for a long time now.
They are listening.
In Brockie’s case, she asks people what they actually think. And in this episode the kids had a view on divorce and its impact on them.
LISTEN
Where does the system give the secondary players (that would be the minor children) a say? Too often they are deemed too young to know what’s best for them. But their behaviour will often tell you that what is happening to them isn’t good.
LISTEN
And yet no one asks them their view. Or if they are asked there is no follow through. We once counselled a senior corporate executive that IF he asked the question then he needed to SHOW how he was acting on the answers.
LISTEN
Children might know what they want today. And then tomorrow they want something different. That’s the nature of small people. But if you spend enough time with them, you will hear a consistent message.
LISTEN
Too often the system pays lip service to listening, and then marshals all the research to tell the individual why they are wrong. Anyone who’s done at least a year at uni knows that you can make the statistics say just about anything if you try hard enough and ask the right questions.
LISTEN
How about listening to the individual? We need a system that stops dragging people to the average. The most amazing comment we ever heard was from a private agency senior manager who told us that neither the Camper nor we were unique. Well my dear, we’ve got news for you. We are. We’re happy to say that there is no one else EXACTLY the same as us in the world. That makes us unique. You wanted to classify us as average so we would fit the statistics and do as you said.
LISTEN
We watched a DOCS worker sit beside a very young child in out of home care, and listen. She asked thoughtful questions, heard the answers, asked some careful and gentle follow up questions. It was done with such care and skill that we were mightily impressed. So if one person in the system can do it, why can’t everyone?
LISTEN
We don’t raise Happy Camper using statistics and averages. We use our love for her, our knowledge of her, and our desire to see her become the person she deserves to be. And so far, all reports from those in ‘the system’ are that she’s going fabulously. Have we proven ourselves? How about listening to us too?
While we think it is one of the most thought-provoking shows on the box, sometimes the dive is way too shallow. Just when you think the issue is finally open, the show finishes. And presenting one perspective, while powerful, can leave a viewer wondering what the other ‘side’ is. Some of the comments on the website suggest that there is another perspective.
But Brockie and Co should be giving lessons, for they are doing what too many institutions, and individuals, have failed to do for a long time now.
They are listening.
In Brockie’s case, she asks people what they actually think. And in this episode the kids had a view on divorce and its impact on them.
LISTEN
Where does the system give the secondary players (that would be the minor children) a say? Too often they are deemed too young to know what’s best for them. But their behaviour will often tell you that what is happening to them isn’t good.
LISTEN
And yet no one asks them their view. Or if they are asked there is no follow through. We once counselled a senior corporate executive that IF he asked the question then he needed to SHOW how he was acting on the answers.
LISTEN
Children might know what they want today. And then tomorrow they want something different. That’s the nature of small people. But if you spend enough time with them, you will hear a consistent message.
LISTEN
Too often the system pays lip service to listening, and then marshals all the research to tell the individual why they are wrong. Anyone who’s done at least a year at uni knows that you can make the statistics say just about anything if you try hard enough and ask the right questions.
LISTEN
How about listening to the individual? We need a system that stops dragging people to the average. The most amazing comment we ever heard was from a private agency senior manager who told us that neither the Camper nor we were unique. Well my dear, we’ve got news for you. We are. We’re happy to say that there is no one else EXACTLY the same as us in the world. That makes us unique. You wanted to classify us as average so we would fit the statistics and do as you said.
LISTEN
We watched a DOCS worker sit beside a very young child in out of home care, and listen. She asked thoughtful questions, heard the answers, asked some careful and gentle follow up questions. It was done with such care and skill that we were mightily impressed. So if one person in the system can do it, why can’t everyone?
LISTEN
We don’t raise Happy Camper using statistics and averages. We use our love for her, our knowledge of her, and our desire to see her become the person she deserves to be. And so far, all reports from those in ‘the system’ are that she’s going fabulously. Have we proven ourselves? How about listening to us too?
At what age can a child make his/her own decision?
06/04/2009 21:47
A decision about what? Before we launch off, let’s refine that question a bit.
There’s been a lot in the news lately regarding children trying to juggle the needs of both parents after a marriage breakdown. Yes, you heard right – the children often do the juggling – emotions, loyalty, sheer tiredness, change of homes. Unfortunately the decision often seems to pay little regard to what the children want. ‘But they are children’, you say? ‘They are too young to know what’s best for them’.
As a foster parent your child may well be juggling contact with a birth family and life with you. Depending on their age and the circumstances you may also find loyalty issues, emotions and stress come from that contact.
So at what age is a child able to offer a valid viewpoint on their contact with a non-custodial parent?
Is it 12 (mentioned in the Adoption Act) or younger? Dare we ask whether younger children, in certain circumstances, actually know what they need?
Our role, as second parents who love the child, is to prepare Happy Camper for life. That means teaching her to have an opinion. And it means teaching her to express that opinion. Given her circumstances and the players in her life, the sooner she learns that skill the better.
And there are good things that flow from that. We are teaching her to talk about things, and not bottle it up. We are teaching her to articulate how she feels and explore her reactions. We are helping her work through how she feels and how to manage. We are teaching her to accept her circumstances as part of life and get it in perspective. And most importantly, we are showing her what control looks like. Hers, actually.
Having an opinion is a fundamental first step to making a decision. Creating and forming opinions, and the two way interaction that usually follows, teaches a child what a good decision looks like.
The importance of this became clear to us when we had a worker who ‘ran’ access. We have no doubts that came about because the agency had an agenda to restore the child to birth parent, combined with a ferocious ‘tick-the-box’ approach. The agency paid lip-service to ‘we are a team and we want your contribution’ but that was a crock. Not only did the relentlessly artificial management of the visit unsettle the Camper mightily, it created a false expectation in the birth family about prospects in the future. The Camper’s view on access, and ours as her foster parents, was simply irrelevant to the agency.
So now the Camper gets a say. She doesn’t make important decisions about her life, and neither does she want to, but she’s learning how it all works. And we are teaching her how to express that opinion to us, to workers, and eventually, to members of her birth family. They will have a better relationship for it.
We think that the adults in ‘the system’, from workers to the judiciary, need to listen a lot more carefully to the small people.
There’s been a lot in the news lately regarding children trying to juggle the needs of both parents after a marriage breakdown. Yes, you heard right – the children often do the juggling – emotions, loyalty, sheer tiredness, change of homes. Unfortunately the decision often seems to pay little regard to what the children want. ‘But they are children’, you say? ‘They are too young to know what’s best for them’.
As a foster parent your child may well be juggling contact with a birth family and life with you. Depending on their age and the circumstances you may also find loyalty issues, emotions and stress come from that contact.
So at what age is a child able to offer a valid viewpoint on their contact with a non-custodial parent?
Is it 12 (mentioned in the Adoption Act) or younger? Dare we ask whether younger children, in certain circumstances, actually know what they need?
Our role, as second parents who love the child, is to prepare Happy Camper for life. That means teaching her to have an opinion. And it means teaching her to express that opinion. Given her circumstances and the players in her life, the sooner she learns that skill the better.
And there are good things that flow from that. We are teaching her to talk about things, and not bottle it up. We are teaching her to articulate how she feels and explore her reactions. We are helping her work through how she feels and how to manage. We are teaching her to accept her circumstances as part of life and get it in perspective. And most importantly, we are showing her what control looks like. Hers, actually.
Having an opinion is a fundamental first step to making a decision. Creating and forming opinions, and the two way interaction that usually follows, teaches a child what a good decision looks like.
The importance of this became clear to us when we had a worker who ‘ran’ access. We have no doubts that came about because the agency had an agenda to restore the child to birth parent, combined with a ferocious ‘tick-the-box’ approach. The agency paid lip-service to ‘we are a team and we want your contribution’ but that was a crock. Not only did the relentlessly artificial management of the visit unsettle the Camper mightily, it created a false expectation in the birth family about prospects in the future. The Camper’s view on access, and ours as her foster parents, was simply irrelevant to the agency.
So now the Camper gets a say. She doesn’t make important decisions about her life, and neither does she want to, but she’s learning how it all works. And we are teaching her how to express that opinion to us, to workers, and eventually, to members of her birth family. They will have a better relationship for it.
We think that the adults in ‘the system’, from workers to the judiciary, need to listen a lot more carefully to the small people.
Good things come to those who wait?
21/12/2008 23:26
It seems sometime since I updated you on my journey to become a foster carer.
“Where’ve you been?” you might ask.
Well, I’ve been sitting here waiting. Waiting for the agency to complete their paperwork. Waiting for checks to be completed and returned. Waiting for a worker to get to my name on their list. Now patience is something I oft struggle with and perhaps this is one of those life lessons that is long overdue.
But leaving that to one side, if there is shortage of carers and children who desperately need a home, then I am bemused, nay befuddled, by the lack of urgency with which the system seems to move. Each time I call to follow up and make sure that the agency has all it needs from me, I am met with the same story of how the process works and that they are very busy and will get to me in due course. Does this apparent lack of resources simply mean there aren’t enough workers? Or are there more kids needing care than previously? Or is it that there is a heightened awareness of children at risk which requires greater levels of investigation and the inevitable paperwork which follows.
I suspect it is a combination. So here I sit and wait for my new life to begin and wonder whether there is something else I should be doing in the meantime. I only hope it’s not like “waiting for Godot” for if my memory serves correctly, Godot never arrived.
Yours in anticipation
Dorothy
Posted by Dorothy
“Where’ve you been?” you might ask.
Well, I’ve been sitting here waiting. Waiting for the agency to complete their paperwork. Waiting for checks to be completed and returned. Waiting for a worker to get to my name on their list. Now patience is something I oft struggle with and perhaps this is one of those life lessons that is long overdue.
But leaving that to one side, if there is shortage of carers and children who desperately need a home, then I am bemused, nay befuddled, by the lack of urgency with which the system seems to move. Each time I call to follow up and make sure that the agency has all it needs from me, I am met with the same story of how the process works and that they are very busy and will get to me in due course. Does this apparent lack of resources simply mean there aren’t enough workers? Or are there more kids needing care than previously? Or is it that there is a heightened awareness of children at risk which requires greater levels of investigation and the inevitable paperwork which follows.
I suspect it is a combination. So here I sit and wait for my new life to begin and wonder whether there is something else I should be doing in the meantime. I only hope it’s not like “waiting for Godot” for if my memory serves correctly, Godot never arrived.
Yours in anticipation
Dorothy
Posted by Dorothy
Foster parent rights?
15/12/2008 22:33
We’ve talked before about being called ‘foster carers’ by the system, when as far as Happy Camper is concerned we are her parents. An article in the SMH today threw that issue into stark focus.
You can read the article here: ‘Agony of deciding who will look after young’ – the byline is ‘An Aboriginal mother has reclaimed her children, but the foster parents are furious, writes Adele Horin.’
By our reading of the article, the two children in question have been in care for about 4-5 years, from when they were very tiny. The biological mother has reclaimed them, after getting her life back on track and establishing a stable relationship.
One paragraph really struck a chord:
‘When is the right time - if ever - to restore children to their biological parents? How is it possible to weigh up children's stability and their attachment to their long-term foster carers against the potential enduring benefits of growing up in their biological family, knowing their siblings and their culture?’
Listen to the language of that paragraph. Biological parents. Biological family. Siblings. Enduring. Adele Horin is using the terminology the system uses.
The problem is – that terminology is loaded with meaning and riddled with assumptions. We all use that language daily and it instantly evokes, for most of us, a sense of right and entitlement and relationships and outcomes.
The people these children have lived with for the last 4-5 years – the bulk - of their lives are referred to in the paragraph as ‘long term foster carers’. The article later explains that for one of the children the foster mother is ‘the only mum he's known’.
The foster carers lost out in that paragraph, big time. The language does not describe any emotional connection with the child that most of us can relate to. Attachment? Carer?
Here’s how it might have read with one small change:
‘When is the right time - if ever - to restore children to their biological parents? How is it possible to weigh up children's stability and their attachment to their second mum and dad and siblings against the potential enduring benefits of growing up in their biological family, knowing their siblings and their culture?’
The child leaps the divide – giving you their heart, their trust, their love. You become their mum and their dad. And yet the system is unwilling to acknowledge the shift. We could be cynical, and say that it helps the system justify the movement of children back to biological parents. You start by using language that maintains a distance between child and new family.
So, having trouble recruiting foster carers? No wonder. There is nothing in that story to reassure any carer that the child they have parented will be with them until the child is able make a decision about their future.
Until prospective carers hear language from the media and the ‘system’ that recognises the emotional bond we ‘carers’ create with these children, it will continue to be difficult to attract quality carers.
Posted by EssentialMum
You can read the article here: ‘Agony of deciding who will look after young’ – the byline is ‘An Aboriginal mother has reclaimed her children, but the foster parents are furious, writes Adele Horin.’
By our reading of the article, the two children in question have been in care for about 4-5 years, from when they were very tiny. The biological mother has reclaimed them, after getting her life back on track and establishing a stable relationship.
One paragraph really struck a chord:
‘When is the right time - if ever - to restore children to their biological parents? How is it possible to weigh up children's stability and their attachment to their long-term foster carers against the potential enduring benefits of growing up in their biological family, knowing their siblings and their culture?’
Listen to the language of that paragraph. Biological parents. Biological family. Siblings. Enduring. Adele Horin is using the terminology the system uses.
The problem is – that terminology is loaded with meaning and riddled with assumptions. We all use that language daily and it instantly evokes, for most of us, a sense of right and entitlement and relationships and outcomes.
The people these children have lived with for the last 4-5 years – the bulk - of their lives are referred to in the paragraph as ‘long term foster carers’. The article later explains that for one of the children the foster mother is ‘the only mum he's known’.
The foster carers lost out in that paragraph, big time. The language does not describe any emotional connection with the child that most of us can relate to. Attachment? Carer?
Here’s how it might have read with one small change:
‘When is the right time - if ever - to restore children to their biological parents? How is it possible to weigh up children's stability and their attachment to their second mum and dad and siblings against the potential enduring benefits of growing up in their biological family, knowing their siblings and their culture?’
The child leaps the divide – giving you their heart, their trust, their love. You become their mum and their dad. And yet the system is unwilling to acknowledge the shift. We could be cynical, and say that it helps the system justify the movement of children back to biological parents. You start by using language that maintains a distance between child and new family.
So, having trouble recruiting foster carers? No wonder. There is nothing in that story to reassure any carer that the child they have parented will be with them until the child is able make a decision about their future.
Until prospective carers hear language from the media and the ‘system’ that recognises the emotional bond we ‘carers’ create with these children, it will continue to be difficult to attract quality carers.
Posted by EssentialMum
'I am a foster child'
26/11/2008 22:17
How should children in care refer to themselves? How should you introduce them?
We don’t do labels.
So Happy Camper is not described to anyone, particularly in her hearing, as a foster child. We introduce her as our daughter. Generally only those who need to know are told her status. And for anyone who needs to know (doctor, teacher), the basic facts are sufficient and explain all that needs to be said.
Foster care is her legal status. So why should that be what describes her?
We sometimes used to feel like the system had given her a secret stamp – only visible to it – that said ‘Child in Care’. Different rules apply to ‘normal’ children. This feeling wasn’t helped by the workers’ frequent response, when we disagreed about a particular action, that ‘this is what we do for all our children in care’. One approach suits all? We knew enough other carers to know that wasn’t true.
This issue about labels is really important.
Labels are pejorative. They are loaded with meaning. We have heard of children in out of home care having the term ‘foster child’ flung at them in the school playground in a derisory way.
Come to think of it, maybe the term ‘foster care’ has had its day. What does ‘foster’ mean anyway? Out-of-home care isn’t much better.
Here’s the definition of foster from dictionary.com:
We like number 3 – to care for or cherish.
We have brought Happy Camper into our family to show her what it means to be cherished. She hasn’t had that before. Make no mistake – she’s been fawned over, and been the centre of attention, and had lots of people spending lots of time reviewing what’s best for her. But she hasn’t been cherished. It’s the strength of that individual care that is making a difference to her life.
We show her what constant, unchanging love looks like, in all its shapes and colours and circumstances. We show her how to receive it and give it. Most people take that for granted.
So we provide family care. The Camper is now part of our family, and nothing will change that even if the circumstances of her care change.
So maybe Family Care is the new description. A new family is caring for this child. What do you think?
Posted by EssentialMum
We don’t do labels.
So Happy Camper is not described to anyone, particularly in her hearing, as a foster child. We introduce her as our daughter. Generally only those who need to know are told her status. And for anyone who needs to know (doctor, teacher), the basic facts are sufficient and explain all that needs to be said.
Foster care is her legal status. So why should that be what describes her?
We sometimes used to feel like the system had given her a secret stamp – only visible to it – that said ‘Child in Care’. Different rules apply to ‘normal’ children. This feeling wasn’t helped by the workers’ frequent response, when we disagreed about a particular action, that ‘this is what we do for all our children in care’. One approach suits all? We knew enough other carers to know that wasn’t true.
This issue about labels is really important.
Labels are pejorative. They are loaded with meaning. We have heard of children in out of home care having the term ‘foster child’ flung at them in the school playground in a derisory way.
Come to think of it, maybe the term ‘foster care’ has had its day. What does ‘foster’ mean anyway? Out-of-home care isn’t much better.
Here’s the definition of foster from dictionary.com:
- to promote the growth or development of; further; encourage, to foster new ideas
- to bring up, raise, or rear as a foster child
- to care for or cherish
- British, to place (a child) in a foster home
We like number 3 – to care for or cherish.
We have brought Happy Camper into our family to show her what it means to be cherished. She hasn’t had that before. Make no mistake – she’s been fawned over, and been the centre of attention, and had lots of people spending lots of time reviewing what’s best for her. But she hasn’t been cherished. It’s the strength of that individual care that is making a difference to her life.
We show her what constant, unchanging love looks like, in all its shapes and colours and circumstances. We show her how to receive it and give it. Most people take that for granted.
So we provide family care. The Camper is now part of our family, and nothing will change that even if the circumstances of her care change.
So maybe Family Care is the new description. A new family is caring for this child. What do you think?
Posted by EssentialMum
Access
17/11/2008 01:13
Reading our posts, you might suspect that all is sorted in Happy Camper world. You might not, but in case you do….
We still have our days.
We have days where the Camper is over-tired, over-excited, or over-whelmed about how she is feeling. In this first wonderful year of school she has had new friends, new activities and new experiences. She challenges boundaries, thinks she is the world’s smartest ‘under-ten’, and gets away with a lot because she is so damn cute.
A quiet weekend, some sound nights’ sleep and some low key activities usually get her ready to charge into the week ahead.
Then there is the week after access with birth family. Manageable, but much harder.
Harder, because what triggers it for the Camper comes from deep within her. She doesn’t understand it, and we are only guessing. We weren’t there, and the information available from that time is poor.
In that week after access the Camper will simply regress. Behaviours will surface that belong to a younger child. Things that she normally will take in her stride become major issues.
We don’t play. We move calmly on. We continue with our routines and normal practices. Now that she’s older, we might give her a look, we might even make a comment - since there is nothing that Happy Camper wants more at present than to be a ‘grown-up’. We’re starting to ask her how she feels after seeing birth family, and that helps.
Our single minded trudge through that post-access week (for some years now), is important to the Camper, make no mistake. In a life marked by early change*, she learns that there is no change now as a result of seeing birth family. That there is no change with us. That’s a big step forward.
And balancing that is her understanding, and recent life experience, that change can be good: it can be exciting, like school – it can be fun, like a new puppy - it doesn’t hit you like a freight train because Mum tells you what’s coming - and that you can rely on EssentialMum. She’ll be there.
Posted by EssentialMum
* The kind of change we are referring to is where a child is moved, frequently, from short term carer to short term carer.
We still have our days.
We have days where the Camper is over-tired, over-excited, or over-whelmed about how she is feeling. In this first wonderful year of school she has had new friends, new activities and new experiences. She challenges boundaries, thinks she is the world’s smartest ‘under-ten’, and gets away with a lot because she is so damn cute.
A quiet weekend, some sound nights’ sleep and some low key activities usually get her ready to charge into the week ahead.
Then there is the week after access with birth family. Manageable, but much harder.
Harder, because what triggers it for the Camper comes from deep within her. She doesn’t understand it, and we are only guessing. We weren’t there, and the information available from that time is poor.
In that week after access the Camper will simply regress. Behaviours will surface that belong to a younger child. Things that she normally will take in her stride become major issues.
We don’t play. We move calmly on. We continue with our routines and normal practices. Now that she’s older, we might give her a look, we might even make a comment - since there is nothing that Happy Camper wants more at present than to be a ‘grown-up’. We’re starting to ask her how she feels after seeing birth family, and that helps.
Our single minded trudge through that post-access week (for some years now), is important to the Camper, make no mistake. In a life marked by early change*, she learns that there is no change now as a result of seeing birth family. That there is no change with us. That’s a big step forward.
And balancing that is her understanding, and recent life experience, that change can be good: it can be exciting, like school – it can be fun, like a new puppy - it doesn’t hit you like a freight train because Mum tells you what’s coming - and that you can rely on EssentialMum. She’ll be there.
Posted by EssentialMum
* The kind of change we are referring to is where a child is moved, frequently, from short term carer to short term carer.
'I've been instructed to...'
31/10/2008 22:42
How timely. In our last post we were being very reasonable about how one might ‘fix’ DOCs.
Well, here’s a problem that needs fixing.
It’s the ‘I’ve been instructed to’ message.
You might get it by email – or if you are lucky (and we have been) you might even get it in person. That’s really special.
Even when a first conversation might be a collaborative discussion, there will come a point where a worker will pull rank. You’ll be told to just do it. They might even move it up the food chain and state ‘I’ve been instructed to…’. Wow, by the Manager.
If we were trying to address all the problems, then we’d acknowledge that there are stubborn, careless, less than satisfactory carers out there who would try the patience of a saint (and probably break the heart of one sometimes) and need to be told what to do.
But we’re not trying to address all the problems. And we don’t need to be told what to do.
In business using the ‘I’ve been instructed to’ defence is called abrogating responsibility, and any manager worth their salary won’t let a team member get away with it. It teaches bad habits and leads to bad outcomes.
In this foster care world, it is toxic. Let us tell you the sub-text that sits behind that request. We’ll range from the generous to the less than….
So don’t serve up the ‘I’ve been instructed to…’ advice to us. It doesn’t wash.
Posted by EssentialMum
Well, here’s a problem that needs fixing.
It’s the ‘I’ve been instructed to’ message.
You might get it by email – or if you are lucky (and we have been) you might even get it in person. That’s really special.
Even when a first conversation might be a collaborative discussion, there will come a point where a worker will pull rank. You’ll be told to just do it. They might even move it up the food chain and state ‘I’ve been instructed to…’. Wow, by the Manager.
If we were trying to address all the problems, then we’d acknowledge that there are stubborn, careless, less than satisfactory carers out there who would try the patience of a saint (and probably break the heart of one sometimes) and need to be told what to do.
But we’re not trying to address all the problems. And we don’t need to be told what to do.
In business using the ‘I’ve been instructed to’ defence is called abrogating responsibility, and any manager worth their salary won’t let a team member get away with it. It teaches bad habits and leads to bad outcomes.
In this foster care world, it is toxic. Let us tell you the sub-text that sits behind that request. We’ll range from the generous to the less than….
- I’m genuinely too busy to negotiate any solution with these people.
- I haven’t got time to debate this.
- I have a job to do.
- You (carer) have a job to do.
- I’m obeying a court order for my case, there is no room in it to accommodate your (carer) needs.
- Your (carer) reason for not being able to accommodate this request is irrelevant.
- I decide what’s best.
- I know what’s best.
- I’m in charge – just do as you (carer) are told.
So don’t serve up the ‘I’ve been instructed to…’ advice to us. It doesn’t wash.
Posted by EssentialMum
Do agencies keep carer lists up to date?
29/09/2008 22:53
We had a phone call recently. A very pleasant young person identified herself as a new case worker with a particular private agency.
We were invited to a social event at the agency, despite the fact that it is well over 12 months since we have been carers with that agency.
When we mentioned this, the worker laughed and advised that she must have had an ‘old’ list.
We were surprised.
Does the agency maintain a ‘current’ list of carers? How often is that updated? Who is accountable for updating it? Are files in the agency marked ‘current’ and ‘past’? How do they manage privacy for ‘closed’ files that they no longer have any accountability for? Can any new worker access any closed file?
Oversights do happen. But we are not inclined to give this agency the benefit of the doubt. It is, sadly, representative of the lack of attention to detail from them.
At an annual case conference, a worker presented a case plan that listed Happy Camper’s only sibling by the wrong name. The same worker arranged a schedule of home visits for the year and completely omitted the most important – visits between Happy Camper and her birth mum. On another occasion the manager had been unable to advise us that birth mum was not attending an access visit because she’d been unable to find our up to date mobile number on the file.
Harsh words? Maybe. We have been known to take a service provider to task for poor service, failure to follow through, or sloppy work. Fine when we are battling over our iPhone bill.
But we expect better. We are dealing with a person. How will Happy Camper feel, many years on, when she reads the case conference notes and sees the errors? She is entitled to expect every adult who has been given a role in her life by ‘the system’ to take the utmost care – of her, of her information, of her feelings.
Poor form indeed.
Posted by EssentialMum.
We were invited to a social event at the agency, despite the fact that it is well over 12 months since we have been carers with that agency.
When we mentioned this, the worker laughed and advised that she must have had an ‘old’ list.
We were surprised.
Does the agency maintain a ‘current’ list of carers? How often is that updated? Who is accountable for updating it? Are files in the agency marked ‘current’ and ‘past’? How do they manage privacy for ‘closed’ files that they no longer have any accountability for? Can any new worker access any closed file?
Oversights do happen. But we are not inclined to give this agency the benefit of the doubt. It is, sadly, representative of the lack of attention to detail from them.
At an annual case conference, a worker presented a case plan that listed Happy Camper’s only sibling by the wrong name. The same worker arranged a schedule of home visits for the year and completely omitted the most important – visits between Happy Camper and her birth mum. On another occasion the manager had been unable to advise us that birth mum was not attending an access visit because she’d been unable to find our up to date mobile number on the file.
Harsh words? Maybe. We have been known to take a service provider to task for poor service, failure to follow through, or sloppy work. Fine when we are battling over our iPhone bill.
But we expect better. We are dealing with a person. How will Happy Camper feel, many years on, when she reads the case conference notes and sees the errors? She is entitled to expect every adult who has been given a role in her life by ‘the system’ to take the utmost care – of her, of her information, of her feelings.
Poor form indeed.
Posted by EssentialMum.
Don't look now: your relationship is not working
18/09/2008 11:43
We had a great conversation recently with our social worker. It was around upcoming activities, holiday birth family contact and arrangements. What made it so great?
We exchanged views with the worker on a couple of issues. We listened to them, they listened to us, and we agreed on an approach that we were both happy with. Importantly, we both agreed that Happy Camper’s requirements were the most important ones. With such a clear agreement about the priority, coming to a solution was easy.
We had a quick word about what Happy Camper was up to. The worker reminded us of how far we have come and what great progress the Camper has made. It was wonderful to see that our worker recalls the journey we’ve taken, and trusts us to continue.
Sounds simple really. But it isn’t always.
We’ve experienced worker/carer meltdown. After several harmonious years, we were assigned a new worker who wanted to change the world, change Happy Camper’s life, and start ‘all over again’. We put our views to the the worker. They were never given a hearing. We outlined what part of the proposed changes we couldn't accommodate. We were told we simply had to. Suddenly issues that never rose before become deal-breakers. The agency and its workers had no room for a differing point of view. Even when Happy Camper had made outstanding progress under our care.
So what are your options? We can’t advise specifically, but here’s what we’ve seen.
Often a carer will try to put up with it because they are concerned that the child in care might become caught in the middle. Or they are concerned that any rising tension in dealing with a worker may flow over to the child. Often a carer, faced daily with numerous challenges in caring for the child, will simply roll with it. Too often a carer has no point of reference (or no time to chase a point of reference) to say ‘Is this really acceptable?’
The risk of going with it is that ‘bad situations’ don’t hold steady. They usually become worse. New issues give rise to new levels of conflict and irritation that build.
You need to work out where the relationship will end up.
Can you roll with it and manage around it? Can you stay calm and detached after contact with the worker? Can you manage the worker’s approach (or the agency’s policies) and still be happy with the outcome for your foster child?
If the answer to any of those is no, we’d suggest you act. Explain clearly to the worker your position. Call a meeting with their manager to discuss your perspective. Give it a go and work through suggested actions to resolve it. But if it still doesn’t work, don’t be afraid to take it higher.
We changed agencies when it became clear that the worker/agency approach was diametrically opposed to what we knew was best for Happy Camper. We were faced with an agency that would not modify any policy or approach one iota, because Happy Camper was ‘just one’ of their many children. The change wasn’t easy, but it was in Happy Camper’s best interests. And like any parent, we find it easy to put her interests first.
Posted by EssentialMum
We exchanged views with the worker on a couple of issues. We listened to them, they listened to us, and we agreed on an approach that we were both happy with. Importantly, we both agreed that Happy Camper’s requirements were the most important ones. With such a clear agreement about the priority, coming to a solution was easy.
We had a quick word about what Happy Camper was up to. The worker reminded us of how far we have come and what great progress the Camper has made. It was wonderful to see that our worker recalls the journey we’ve taken, and trusts us to continue.
Sounds simple really. But it isn’t always.
We’ve experienced worker/carer meltdown. After several harmonious years, we were assigned a new worker who wanted to change the world, change Happy Camper’s life, and start ‘all over again’. We put our views to the the worker. They were never given a hearing. We outlined what part of the proposed changes we couldn't accommodate. We were told we simply had to. Suddenly issues that never rose before become deal-breakers. The agency and its workers had no room for a differing point of view. Even when Happy Camper had made outstanding progress under our care.
So what are your options? We can’t advise specifically, but here’s what we’ve seen.
Often a carer will try to put up with it because they are concerned that the child in care might become caught in the middle. Or they are concerned that any rising tension in dealing with a worker may flow over to the child. Often a carer, faced daily with numerous challenges in caring for the child, will simply roll with it. Too often a carer has no point of reference (or no time to chase a point of reference) to say ‘Is this really acceptable?’
The risk of going with it is that ‘bad situations’ don’t hold steady. They usually become worse. New issues give rise to new levels of conflict and irritation that build.
You need to work out where the relationship will end up.
Can you roll with it and manage around it? Can you stay calm and detached after contact with the worker? Can you manage the worker’s approach (or the agency’s policies) and still be happy with the outcome for your foster child?
If the answer to any of those is no, we’d suggest you act. Explain clearly to the worker your position. Call a meeting with their manager to discuss your perspective. Give it a go and work through suggested actions to resolve it. But if it still doesn’t work, don’t be afraid to take it higher.
We changed agencies when it became clear that the worker/agency approach was diametrically opposed to what we knew was best for Happy Camper. We were faced with an agency that would not modify any policy or approach one iota, because Happy Camper was ‘just one’ of their many children. The change wasn’t easy, but it was in Happy Camper’s best interests. And like any parent, we find it easy to put her interests first.
Posted by EssentialMum
When do we connect the dots .................?
25/07/2008 22:51
EssentialMum offloaded a car last year. She filled out her paperwork for the RTA transferring registration.
So - stay with me here - how interesting to receive an E-Toll statement this week, containing recent toll charges for the offloaded vehicle. Not high. Just wrong.
The E-Toll statement has the RTA logo on the top left corner, as well as the Roads and Traffic Authority business name and ABN (Australian Business Number). The links to the web for further information take the user to the RTA site. One could assume they were part of the RTA in fact. Couldn’t one?
EssentialMum rang the Operations Centre, and politely enquired as to why charges were still coming through for the offloaded car. The very polite and helpful staffer told us that the charges occurred when a tag didn’t work – so they would confirm the car registration and manually charge whichever E-Toll account had that car rego listed on it.
So one part of the RTA that processes a transfer in registration of a vehicle has no way of informing another part of the RTA of the change in ownership. In this age of connectivity, you’ve got to be kidding!
It’s a good day when we learn something – even if it is how to manage our E-Toll account. But it struck a chord with us.
This is what child welfare services struggle with.
No one joins the dots, and in those circumstances it is often a child’s life at risk, not a few dollars on a toll charge. In child welfare it is not just within an organisation, but across all parties charged with some responsibility for children’s welfare and safety.
How hard could it be to create a networked database, accessible by all required parties, to track case plans, incidents, issues and care plans for children at risk? Of course there are privacy issues. Corporations have been managing customer privacy issues for years.
Can you imagine the information flow if a case worker, a doctor, a teacher, a police officer, a community health worker, a foster parent, even a birth parent could communicate online? About a child. One can only dream.
Posted by EssentialMum
So - stay with me here - how interesting to receive an E-Toll statement this week, containing recent toll charges for the offloaded vehicle. Not high. Just wrong.
The E-Toll statement has the RTA logo on the top left corner, as well as the Roads and Traffic Authority business name and ABN (Australian Business Number). The links to the web for further information take the user to the RTA site. One could assume they were part of the RTA in fact. Couldn’t one?
EssentialMum rang the Operations Centre, and politely enquired as to why charges were still coming through for the offloaded car. The very polite and helpful staffer told us that the charges occurred when a tag didn’t work – so they would confirm the car registration and manually charge whichever E-Toll account had that car rego listed on it.
So one part of the RTA that processes a transfer in registration of a vehicle has no way of informing another part of the RTA of the change in ownership. In this age of connectivity, you’ve got to be kidding!
It’s a good day when we learn something – even if it is how to manage our E-Toll account. But it struck a chord with us.
This is what child welfare services struggle with.
No one joins the dots, and in those circumstances it is often a child’s life at risk, not a few dollars on a toll charge. In child welfare it is not just within an organisation, but across all parties charged with some responsibility for children’s welfare and safety.
How hard could it be to create a networked database, accessible by all required parties, to track case plans, incidents, issues and care plans for children at risk? Of course there are privacy issues. Corporations have been managing customer privacy issues for years.
Can you imagine the information flow if a case worker, a doctor, a teacher, a police officer, a community health worker, a foster parent, even a birth parent could communicate online? About a child. One can only dream.
Posted by EssentialMum
We have a new dog and we don’t know anything about her
01/07/2008 20:37
Dogs don't live as long as we do. Some deserve to live longer than they do, given how loving, and loyal, and friendly, and funny they are. If you are going to be a dog owner for life then you have to learn say farewell to old friends and welcome new ones.
After losing a terrific dog last year we have adopted a new dog. She's two - while we love puppies there are always some lovely older dogs looking for a home. Our male dog came to us at 14 months, bonded beautifully and has been a loving pal for 8 years now.
Our new pup came via a friend. And when she arrived, we realised:
So we’ve developed our understanding of this little dog over the last months. Happy Camper has been delighted to find a real little playmate. Fine for a dog.
So how 'disappointing' (you can insert your own adjective here depending on your viewpoint) to tell you that the experience was pretty much the same with Happy Camper. Despite all the networks and information amassed on these children and their families and their circumstances, we knew next to nothing when she came. We had three visits with the previous carers as part of the handover and asked as many questions as we could in the allotted time, but how do you cover a child's life in a couple of hours?
When Happy Camper came to us:
So what do you do?
You don't waste time, at that point, making an issue of it.
You start from where you are. We’ve built Happy Camper’s life again from the ground up, and as she gets older we will increase the information about her family and her past.
But it would be good if all those who work with us, care for us and help us, remember that often we have to dive in, terrain unknown, and sort it out as we go along. That takes guts, and skill, and tenacity, and strength.
Posted by EssentialMum
After losing a terrific dog last year we have adopted a new dog. She's two - while we love puppies there are always some lovely older dogs looking for a home. Our male dog came to us at 14 months, bonded beautifully and has been a loving pal for 8 years now.
Our new pup came via a friend. And when she arrived, we realised:
- We had no detail about where she lived before.
- We had no information about her previous family, other than that she’d been used to children.
- We had no detail about her day-to-day life, her habits, and her routines.
- We didn’t know what food she liked, what treats were special.
- We had no special toy for her.
- We had no understanding of her experiences – what she was used to, what she handled well, what she was unsettled by.
So we’ve developed our understanding of this little dog over the last months. Happy Camper has been delighted to find a real little playmate. Fine for a dog.
You know where we are going with this one ... don't you?
So how 'disappointing' (you can insert your own adjective here depending on your viewpoint) to tell you that the experience was pretty much the same with Happy Camper. Despite all the networks and information amassed on these children and their families and their circumstances, we knew next to nothing when she came. We had three visits with the previous carers as part of the handover and asked as many questions as we could in the allotted time, but how do you cover a child's life in a couple of hours?
When Happy Camper came to us:
- We had the barest detail on her day to day routine.
- We had very few photos of the time she spent with her previous family. We've now raised it with our current (very good) worker to fill some of these gaps.
- We had no toys. Lots of McDonalds giveaways but not one special teddy or doll that was Happy Camper's.
- We had four outfits. Lots of baby clothes from when Happy Camper was 12 months old. Nothing close to an reasonable ‘wardrobe’ for a two year old.
So what do you do?
You don't waste time, at that point, making an issue of it.
You start from where you are. We’ve built Happy Camper’s life again from the ground up, and as she gets older we will increase the information about her family and her past.
But it would be good if all those who work with us, care for us and help us, remember that often we have to dive in, terrain unknown, and sort it out as we go along. That takes guts, and skill, and tenacity, and strength.
Posted by EssentialMum
Getting access right
16/06/2008 22:07
With school holidays just around the corner, our thoughts and plans, now that Happy Camper is at school, turn to access.
It was more difficult when she was tiny, when her behaviour after the visit showed how deep the impact of the visit was for her, and when we couldn’t discuss it.
Access covers so many different circumstances that 'what works' will be vastly different for us all. So here are some things we’ve learned:
Align the venue or activity with your foster child's natural inclination. If they are physical, get outdoors. It sounds really obvious, but it's amazing how you can end up at a venue that suits no one. We spent several visits at a local council library. Birth Mum was completely at sea with the concept of interacting with her child through reading, Happy Camper was constrained by the environment (don't run, be quiet). As both Birth Mum and Happy Camper struggled to interact Social Worker took over, to role model for Birth Mum. She ended up playing with Happy Camper while Birth Mum came and sat with EssentialMum. We both wondered what access was all about.
Now we meet at a park, or a pool, with lots of space and activities that allow Happy Camper to let off steam, play quite exclusively with Birth Mum, come back to join us, sit and talk. Birth Mum also sees the real Happy Camper - the tears when something doesn't go right for her, and the courage that sees her climb to the top of the monkey bars. Birth Mum is scared of heights and it is a challenge for her to see her daughter standing so straight and tall and confidently at the top of the climbing frame. It's testing her perception of Happy Camper and helping her see the real little person.
We've seen an improvement in how Happy Camper deals with access as a result and the whole effect is much more natural.
So have a say. Offer your view to the social workers about access. You know the child best.
Posted by EssentialMum
Happy Camper enjoys seeing Birth Mum. Now Happy Camper is much more articulate it is easier to discuss how she feels about the visits and what she likes.
It was more difficult when she was tiny, when her behaviour after the visit showed how deep the impact of the visit was for her, and when we couldn’t discuss it.
Access covers so many different circumstances that 'what works' will be vastly different for us all. So here are some things we’ve learned:
Align the venue or activity with your foster child's natural inclination. If they are physical, get outdoors. It sounds really obvious, but it's amazing how you can end up at a venue that suits no one. We spent several visits at a local council library. Birth Mum was completely at sea with the concept of interacting with her child through reading, Happy Camper was constrained by the environment (don't run, be quiet). As both Birth Mum and Happy Camper struggled to interact Social Worker took over, to role model for Birth Mum. She ended up playing with Happy Camper while Birth Mum came and sat with EssentialMum. We both wondered what access was all about.
Now we meet at a park, or a pool, with lots of space and activities that allow Happy Camper to let off steam, play quite exclusively with Birth Mum, come back to join us, sit and talk. Birth Mum also sees the real Happy Camper - the tears when something doesn't go right for her, and the courage that sees her climb to the top of the monkey bars. Birth Mum is scared of heights and it is a challenge for her to see her daughter standing so straight and tall and confidently at the top of the climbing frame. It's testing her perception of Happy Camper and helping her see the real little person.
We've seen an improvement in how Happy Camper deals with access as a result and the whole effect is much more natural.
So have a say. Offer your view to the social workers about access. You know the child best.
Posted by EssentialMum
Becoming a foster carer - Dorothy's journey
05/06/2008 00:40
Hi there. My name is Dorothy and I’m about to launch into the biggest adventure of my life.
I’m about to become a long term fostercarer.
So how did it all come about? Well, to cut a long story short, I was having a really bad time at work – really bad. A disagreement with my boss set me back on my heels and got me wondering what I was doing with my life. I’d studied hard and established a great career. I’d worked for the same company for 7 years and was now a successful executive. I was financially stable and owned my own home. I had a great life, so why did it all seem so empty? Having worked so hard for so long, what I was doing it all for?
My cousin is a longterm fostercarer. She is just awesome. You know, one of those people you aspire to be. I’d always known about fostercare, but never really thought seriously about it. I mean, can a 36 year old single woman be a fostercarer?
So after a good deal of self analysis and research and many conversations with my cousin, I called DOCS. I could have gone with an agency but found that DOCS were really responsive and easy to deal with.
So here I am about to undertake my fostercarer training and writing 'my story'. It’s an odd experience to revisit your life in five year increments from birth to your current age. A time to reflect on all the things that make you who you are today.
It’s been invaluable to be able to talk to my cousin about her experiences and the challenges and joys. Her foster child is a delight and it’s been a privilege to watch the development from a little person at risk into a robust, funny, energetic child who is self confident and nurtured and has a wonderful full life.
My cousin’s life is that much richer for the experience and it is this, more than anything else, that inspired me to start my journey.
I still have questions and doubts and wonder how I’m going to do it all. But I am secure in the knowledge that I am surrounded by wonderful family and friends who support me in this adventure and will be there when I need advice or help or just need to talk.
It’s a huge decision, to turn your life upside down and share it with someone new. To forego much of your personal freedom and defer to the needs and wants of a child who will have been through more than any child should.
But then I am incredibly fortunate and have the chance to make a real difference. And what could be more meaningful than that?
Posted by Dorothy
I’m about to become a long term fostercarer.
So how did it all come about? Well, to cut a long story short, I was having a really bad time at work – really bad. A disagreement with my boss set me back on my heels and got me wondering what I was doing with my life. I’d studied hard and established a great career. I’d worked for the same company for 7 years and was now a successful executive. I was financially stable and owned my own home. I had a great life, so why did it all seem so empty? Having worked so hard for so long, what I was doing it all for?
My cousin is a longterm fostercarer. She is just awesome. You know, one of those people you aspire to be. I’d always known about fostercare, but never really thought seriously about it. I mean, can a 36 year old single woman be a fostercarer?
So after a good deal of self analysis and research and many conversations with my cousin, I called DOCS. I could have gone with an agency but found that DOCS were really responsive and easy to deal with.
So here I am about to undertake my fostercarer training and writing 'my story'. It’s an odd experience to revisit your life in five year increments from birth to your current age. A time to reflect on all the things that make you who you are today.
It’s been invaluable to be able to talk to my cousin about her experiences and the challenges and joys. Her foster child is a delight and it’s been a privilege to watch the development from a little person at risk into a robust, funny, energetic child who is self confident and nurtured and has a wonderful full life.
My cousin’s life is that much richer for the experience and it is this, more than anything else, that inspired me to start my journey.
I still have questions and doubts and wonder how I’m going to do it all. But I am secure in the knowledge that I am surrounded by wonderful family and friends who support me in this adventure and will be there when I need advice or help or just need to talk.
It’s a huge decision, to turn your life upside down and share it with someone new. To forego much of your personal freedom and defer to the needs and wants of a child who will have been through more than any child should.
But then I am incredibly fortunate and have the chance to make a real difference. And what could be more meaningful than that?
Posted by Dorothy
'This is what you signed up for'
02/06/2008 22:10
We heard those words from a private agency social worker, justifying why a number of well-established routines needed to change, two years into the placement.
Nothing else had changed except the worker. Happy Camper had made great progress and settled in well. She still showed a reaction to access visits with Birth Mum, and so every effort was made to normalize those visits for her. That meant EssentialMum came too, a safety blanket for a four year old camper.
What was proposed was a major change:
We explained politely that we didn’t see why there was a need for such a change to the routine, when the existing one served Happy Camper well.
And those words came back to us with quite a deal of frustration from the worker.
‘This is what you signed up for.’
So what did we sign up for? It was obvious that in this circumstance the social worker’s view of it and ours were vastly different.
Did we sign up to care for this child as if she were our own? Yes.
Did we sign up to let social workers dictate, without discussion, how things should be done for this child? No.
In our family, we acknowledge the professional expertise of many people we deal with (we actually have quite a bit of professional expertise ourselves so we respect it in others). But we don't blindly accept it. Bringing our view of what's right and appropriate for this child (living with her means we actually know her REALLY WELL now) is called responsibility.
That's what we signed up for.
This same agency cheerfully gave us a copy of Mary Ann Goodearle's book Everything but the Kids - A Guide to Foster Parenting (for full publishing details see the Resources Tab). One chapter specifically talks about foster parents demanding a seat at the table and taking responsibility for decisions regarding the child, not merely updating a social worker on how the child is reacting and expecting the social worker to make the decision.
Our experience is that, like corporates and firms and government departments, some agencies and workers may talk the talk. But they will find foster parents confronting when they offer an opinion and are prepared to suggest a course of action. You may hear the words 'collaboration' and 'value your opinion'. If you choose to speak up, expressing your opinion may create tension. How you work through that, and whether in fact it can be resolved, is another issue.
Posted by EssentialMum
Nothing else had changed except the worker. Happy Camper had made great progress and settled in well. She still showed a reaction to access visits with Birth Mum, and so every effort was made to normalize those visits for her. That meant EssentialMum came too, a safety blanket for a four year old camper.
What was proposed was a major change:
- A new schedule for far more frequent social worker visits, on a day that suited the social worker but not the foster family.
- A new approach for visits between Happy Camper and her Birth Mum that excluded EssentialMum.
- A more 'significant' role for social worker in Happy Camper's life.
We explained politely that we didn’t see why there was a need for such a change to the routine, when the existing one served Happy Camper well.
And those words came back to us with quite a deal of frustration from the worker.
‘This is what you signed up for.’
So what did we sign up for? It was obvious that in this circumstance the social worker’s view of it and ours were vastly different.
Did we sign up to care for this child as if she were our own? Yes.
Did we sign up to let social workers dictate, without discussion, how things should be done for this child? No.
In our family, we acknowledge the professional expertise of many people we deal with (we actually have quite a bit of professional expertise ourselves so we respect it in others). But we don't blindly accept it. Bringing our view of what's right and appropriate for this child (living with her means we actually know her REALLY WELL now) is called responsibility.
That's what we signed up for.
This same agency cheerfully gave us a copy of Mary Ann Goodearle's book Everything but the Kids - A Guide to Foster Parenting (for full publishing details see the Resources Tab). One chapter specifically talks about foster parents demanding a seat at the table and taking responsibility for decisions regarding the child, not merely updating a social worker on how the child is reacting and expecting the social worker to make the decision.
Our experience is that, like corporates and firms and government departments, some agencies and workers may talk the talk. But they will find foster parents confronting when they offer an opinion and are prepared to suggest a course of action. You may hear the words 'collaboration' and 'value your opinion'. If you choose to speak up, expressing your opinion may create tension. How you work through that, and whether in fact it can be resolved, is another issue.
Posted by EssentialMum