self-awareness
Lift your game carers
Just so you know we are quite prepared to have a go at anyone, we bring you our latest opinion.
It’s time for carers to set a standard.
When a consultation paper has just been released in relation to National Standards for Out of Home Care, we wonder whether carers need to step up and set more of those standards themselves, by their actions.
Here’s one. A simple one really.
We’ve welcomed a number of foster children into our home over the years. Foster children who have been in other foster care placements. Not one has arrived with nice clothes, well cared for and loved toys, packaged in a decent bag.
We are inspired by the work Backpacks for Aussie Kids are doing. They aim to fill backpacks and nappy bags with essential and personal items for children going into foster and kinship care.
So here’s the rule we’d like to see carers adopt:
Foster carers will not send children in care to another placement with their belongings in plastic bags.
And no, those blue, red and white striped bags, from Kmart or Target, don’t cut it either.
How do you begin to show a child they are worth anything, when dropping their belongings into a plastic bag is acceptable? You might try and convince us that the child, if they are young enough, is oblivious to it.
That’s not the point.
It’s all about care and respect.
Care and respect for the child. Care about their belongings. Care about the small number of toys, items and clothing that, in some circumstances, make up this child’s life. Respect that, no matter how young they are, belongings are important.
Carers, go buy a decent bag, or demand one from your worker. You get an allowance each fortnight. Use it.
Just in case you wondered, the move this child will make from you to their next placement is always significant. They will listen and watch and take their cues in a way we adults have long lost. Treat them with respect, and treat their belongings with respect too.
It’s time for carers to set a standard.
When a consultation paper has just been released in relation to National Standards for Out of Home Care, we wonder whether carers need to step up and set more of those standards themselves, by their actions.
Here’s one. A simple one really.
We’ve welcomed a number of foster children into our home over the years. Foster children who have been in other foster care placements. Not one has arrived with nice clothes, well cared for and loved toys, packaged in a decent bag.
We are inspired by the work Backpacks for Aussie Kids are doing. They aim to fill backpacks and nappy bags with essential and personal items for children going into foster and kinship care.
So here’s the rule we’d like to see carers adopt:
Foster carers will not send children in care to another placement with their belongings in plastic bags.
And no, those blue, red and white striped bags, from Kmart or Target, don’t cut it either.
How do you begin to show a child they are worth anything, when dropping their belongings into a plastic bag is acceptable? You might try and convince us that the child, if they are young enough, is oblivious to it.
That’s not the point.
It’s all about care and respect.
Care and respect for the child. Care about their belongings. Care about the small number of toys, items and clothing that, in some circumstances, make up this child’s life. Respect that, no matter how young they are, belongings are important.
Carers, go buy a decent bag, or demand one from your worker. You get an allowance each fortnight. Use it.
Just in case you wondered, the move this child will make from you to their next placement is always significant. They will listen and watch and take their cues in a way we adults have long lost. Treat them with respect, and treat their belongings with respect too.
|
Can a foster parent ‘over-advocate’ for their foster child?
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.
You can't force a relationship
‘THE Family Court has warned separated parents that they are required to hand over children for access visits, whether the children want to go or not.
While parents don't have to "physically drag" the children to the other parent, they do have to "positively encourage" them to go, and punish those who refuse.’
This quote is from an article in The Australian. The Family Court is saying that a parent should punish a child who refuses to abide by any orders made about their access with other parents. If ever there was an example of parental rights walking rough-shod over the well-being of a child, and enshrined in law, this is it.
So it struck a chord with us. Because at some stage your foster child might not want to go to a contact visit to meet with members of their birth family.
Their reaction, and how you and the support network handles it, will depend on the child, the birth family, and the stage of understanding and development the child is at. It will also depend on how skilled your social worker is, and what the social worker’s agenda is.
The article bothers us, not least because a Family Court Judge appears to be slavishly adopting what we have come to think of as dodgy law. Law becomes dodgy when it is high-jacked by interest groups, and driven by a political agenda.
It bothers us because, as Pragnell says, ‘how can it be in (a child’s) best interests to force them into a relationship?’
We’ve seen social workers ‘play God’ (and we don’t use that expression lightly) with foster children’s relationships for many, many years. We’ve seen foster families denied any follow up relationship with a foster child after a placement has ended, despite the fact that relationship was the longest and most stable of the child’s life. And we’ve experienced contact visits with birth family being managed aggressively by the social workers.
You can’t force a relationship.
Here’s what can happen if a foster child is forced into a relationship:
But the system should tread softly for the children’s sake. There are no hard and fast rules or policy, not if you accept that every child is an individual. What is in the child’s best interest at that point in time, considering their age, circumstances, development and security, should prevail.
What should you, as a foster parent, do in these circumstances if you see a relationship being forced? Stand up for your foster child. Support what you think is best for them. Fight if you have to. We’ve done it.
While parents don't have to "physically drag" the children to the other parent, they do have to "positively encourage" them to go, and punish those who refuse.’
This quote is from an article in The Australian. The Family Court is saying that a parent should punish a child who refuses to abide by any orders made about their access with other parents. If ever there was an example of parental rights walking rough-shod over the well-being of a child, and enshrined in law, this is it.
So it struck a chord with us. Because at some stage your foster child might not want to go to a contact visit to meet with members of their birth family.
Their reaction, and how you and the support network handles it, will depend on the child, the birth family, and the stage of understanding and development the child is at. It will also depend on how skilled your social worker is, and what the social worker’s agenda is.
The article bothers us, not least because a Family Court Judge appears to be slavishly adopting what we have come to think of as dodgy law. Law becomes dodgy when it is high-jacked by interest groups, and driven by a political agenda.
It bothers us because, as Pragnell says, ‘how can it be in (a child’s) best interests to force them into a relationship?’
We’ve seen social workers ‘play God’ (and we don’t use that expression lightly) with foster children’s relationships for many, many years. We’ve seen foster families denied any follow up relationship with a foster child after a placement has ended, despite the fact that relationship was the longest and most stable of the child’s life. And we’ve experienced contact visits with birth family being managed aggressively by the social workers.
- Members of the foster family were told not to attend. This was despite the fact that the Camper was drawing great comfort and stability from the newly forming foster relationships, and needed them even more when confronted by birth family.
- Any and all members of birth family were entitled to turn up, no notice required. So when the Camper was dealing with who her birth family members were and the part they played in her life, another one would appear.
- Social workers forced intervention between the Camper and members of the birth family. There were instructions to hug, play, undertake activities. When it wasn’t happening sufficiently, the social workers took over, running the visit. The look on the Camper’s face when told, by essentially a stranger, to hug another stranger, would have been funny were it not so distressing.
You can’t force a relationship.
Here’s what can happen if a foster child is forced into a relationship:
- You run the risk of alienating the child towards their birth family.
- Pushing an aggressive agenda of interaction risks the child losing trust in the social worker.
- Forcing a relationship between foster child and birth family risks the child losing faith in their foster parent. ‘You’re not in control of this’ they will say to you. ‘You can’t help me’.
But the system should tread softly for the children’s sake. There are no hard and fast rules or policy, not if you accept that every child is an individual. What is in the child’s best interest at that point in time, considering their age, circumstances, development and security, should prevail.
What should you, as a foster parent, do in these circumstances if you see a relationship being forced? Stand up for your foster child. Support what you think is best for them. Fight if you have to. We’ve done it.
Children's sense of time
Continuing our series from the American Academy of Pediatrics article.
This post deals with children’s sense of time, and how that specifically impacts children in foster care.
Placing children in care might deal with their immediate need for physical care, nourishment, comfort, affection and stimulation. But continuity of care is critical (continuity means continuous or connected). Children need to learn how to bond and trust, and that happens with a stable consistent carer over a period of time. So changes to their carer can be detrimental. Temporary care can, in fact, be detrimental.
And if a child is suffering the consequences of stress and inadequate parenting, then moving them from home to home only makes it worse. This reminds us of the Eggshells comment from Jen who writes about a foster child’s perspective at www.fostercareinamerica.com.
So how do adults deal with change and impermanence? Some restless souls like it. But most of us build on the self-reliance that we have learned, probably from stable and supportive parents and family circumstances, over the years. And we usually have the skill to anticipate and plan for a time when things settle down. We may well have experienced more settled times before, so we know what they look like.
But kids have few life experiences to draw on. They can’t pull out an experience and say ‘well, the last time that happened to me I handled it this way.’ They simply don’t have enough experiences in ‘the bank’.
And they are right in the process of discovering who they are. They don’t yet have a strong sense of ‘self’, not like adults do. It’s being created. A child in a stable family doesn’t have to be anxious about the fundamentals like nurturing, protection, trust and security. So they are free to get on with working out who they are. For a child in care energy is expended on the fundamentals. Who will care for them? Are they safe? Who will protect them? Who can they trust?
And think about how children focus. On the right here, right now. We have enough trouble getting the Camper to plan for the next hour, let alone the next month, year and so on (although the stand-out exception there is her birthday party. That goes into SWAT type planning at least 7 months before the date).
So because young children don’t understand the concept of temporary versus permanent, periods of time are largely incomprehensible to them. The younger they are, the longer the disruption – the more impact it will have.
This section of the report concludes ‘pediatricians should advocate that evaluation, planning, placement and treatment decision be made as quickly as possible, especially for very young children’. They are saying that the clock is ticking - every minute has an impact on the child.
When we hear workers say that their primary focus is on the ‘family’, we worry like hell for the individual children.
This post deals with children’s sense of time, and how that specifically impacts children in foster care.
Placing children in care might deal with their immediate need for physical care, nourishment, comfort, affection and stimulation. But continuity of care is critical (continuity means continuous or connected). Children need to learn how to bond and trust, and that happens with a stable consistent carer over a period of time. So changes to their carer can be detrimental. Temporary care can, in fact, be detrimental.
And if a child is suffering the consequences of stress and inadequate parenting, then moving them from home to home only makes it worse. This reminds us of the Eggshells comment from Jen who writes about a foster child’s perspective at www.fostercareinamerica.com.
So how do adults deal with change and impermanence? Some restless souls like it. But most of us build on the self-reliance that we have learned, probably from stable and supportive parents and family circumstances, over the years. And we usually have the skill to anticipate and plan for a time when things settle down. We may well have experienced more settled times before, so we know what they look like.
But kids have few life experiences to draw on. They can’t pull out an experience and say ‘well, the last time that happened to me I handled it this way.’ They simply don’t have enough experiences in ‘the bank’.
And they are right in the process of discovering who they are. They don’t yet have a strong sense of ‘self’, not like adults do. It’s being created. A child in a stable family doesn’t have to be anxious about the fundamentals like nurturing, protection, trust and security. So they are free to get on with working out who they are. For a child in care energy is expended on the fundamentals. Who will care for them? Are they safe? Who will protect them? Who can they trust?
And think about how children focus. On the right here, right now. We have enough trouble getting the Camper to plan for the next hour, let alone the next month, year and so on (although the stand-out exception there is her birthday party. That goes into SWAT type planning at least 7 months before the date).
So because young children don’t understand the concept of temporary versus permanent, periods of time are largely incomprehensible to them. The younger they are, the longer the disruption – the more impact it will have.
This section of the report concludes ‘pediatricians should advocate that evaluation, planning, placement and treatment decision be made as quickly as possible, especially for very young children’. They are saying that the clock is ticking - every minute has an impact on the child.
When we hear workers say that their primary focus is on the ‘family’, we worry like hell for the individual children.
Self control, and self interest, for children in care?
An interesting article crossed our desk this week.
It’s from The New Yorker, and it’s about self-control. Or rather, the ability or willingness of some people to delay gratification. The experiment, carried out in the 1960’s at Stanford University, put nursery school children in a room with a treat. The researcher offered that they could eat it straight away, but that if they waited until the researcher came back before eating it, they would get a second treat. A number of children successfully waited, and they used a number of mechanisms to take their focus off the treat sitting before them.
Over time, and with further analysis, the researcher ‘began to notice a link between the children’s academic performance as teenagers and their ability to wait for the second marshmallow’.
We quote: ‘ “What we’re really measuring with the marshmallows isn’t will power or self-control,” Mischel says. “It’s much more important than that. This task forces kids to find a way to make the situation work for them. They want the second marshmallow, but how can they get it? We can’t control the world, but we can control how we think about it.”’
This struck a chord with us. So many stories from children in care highlight how powerless and fearful they felt. So much of a skilled and loving parent’s task should be to teach children how to make situations work for them, to understand the ‘give and take’ or negotiations that they need to undertake for many reasons – safety, happiness, fulfilment, success. And if that kind of care and teaching is missing, how disadvantaged are these children in coping with life?
When Happy Camper came to live with us, self-control was an alien concept. She was completely impulsive, fearful of change and dreadfully upset when any experience she was enjoying ended.
Nowdays, the degree of negotiation that goes on at our house makes us feel a bit like the United Nations. On occasion we have to invoke the ‘just do it’ creed. But after reading this article, we are pleased to see that the Camper is well and truly working out how to make situations work for her. She’s often thinking through all the elements of recognition, reward and gratification and shuffling them around to see what suits her.
We like that sense of robustness and, to be frank, self-interest. There is plenty of time to teach her to put others first (and we have started that journey), but given her background, we’re happy to see her learn to put herself first. She missed that bit. She was too busy just struggling to survive.
So how did we start her on this path? Firstly, we showed her how loving parents nurture their children. We showed her how we could put her first above everything. She learned how it felt to have every need catered for. We hope, and we think, that she’s learned that she deserves it.
Second, even when she was tiny we offered her both a reason to do what we wanted her to do, and an understanding of the consequences. It took time and it took energy, and sometimes it was clearly beyond her understanding and will power. But she began to learn how everything is connected, that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, and that her actions trigger different outcomes.
We’re proud of how far the Camper has come.
It’s from The New Yorker, and it’s about self-control. Or rather, the ability or willingness of some people to delay gratification. The experiment, carried out in the 1960’s at Stanford University, put nursery school children in a room with a treat. The researcher offered that they could eat it straight away, but that if they waited until the researcher came back before eating it, they would get a second treat. A number of children successfully waited, and they used a number of mechanisms to take their focus off the treat sitting before them.
Over time, and with further analysis, the researcher ‘began to notice a link between the children’s academic performance as teenagers and their ability to wait for the second marshmallow’.
We quote: ‘ “What we’re really measuring with the marshmallows isn’t will power or self-control,” Mischel says. “It’s much more important than that. This task forces kids to find a way to make the situation work for them. They want the second marshmallow, but how can they get it? We can’t control the world, but we can control how we think about it.”’
This struck a chord with us. So many stories from children in care highlight how powerless and fearful they felt. So much of a skilled and loving parent’s task should be to teach children how to make situations work for them, to understand the ‘give and take’ or negotiations that they need to undertake for many reasons – safety, happiness, fulfilment, success. And if that kind of care and teaching is missing, how disadvantaged are these children in coping with life?
When Happy Camper came to live with us, self-control was an alien concept. She was completely impulsive, fearful of change and dreadfully upset when any experience she was enjoying ended.
Nowdays, the degree of negotiation that goes on at our house makes us feel a bit like the United Nations. On occasion we have to invoke the ‘just do it’ creed. But after reading this article, we are pleased to see that the Camper is well and truly working out how to make situations work for her. She’s often thinking through all the elements of recognition, reward and gratification and shuffling them around to see what suits her.
We like that sense of robustness and, to be frank, self-interest. There is plenty of time to teach her to put others first (and we have started that journey), but given her background, we’re happy to see her learn to put herself first. She missed that bit. She was too busy just struggling to survive.
So how did we start her on this path? Firstly, we showed her how loving parents nurture their children. We showed her how we could put her first above everything. She learned how it felt to have every need catered for. We hope, and we think, that she’s learned that she deserves it.
Second, even when she was tiny we offered her both a reason to do what we wanted her to do, and an understanding of the consequences. It took time and it took energy, and sometimes it was clearly beyond her understanding and will power. But she began to learn how everything is connected, that every action has an equal and opposite reaction, and that her actions trigger different outcomes.
We’re proud of how far the Camper has come.
Teaching a child to make a decision
We don’t presume to tell anyone how to make decisions, although there’s plenty of room in the business world for more practice.
We talked in our last post about teaching the Camper to have an opinion, and how having an opinion is pretty fundamental to making a decision.
We’re good at decisions. We’ve had lots of practice, and we are never short of an opinion on anything, funnily enough. But our willingness to take the lead was a source of tension with the private agency. We kept tripping over ‘the line’ drawn by the ‘experts’, and they weren’t giving up territory to anyone. You could argue that they thought they were doing their job. But we think they needed to learn the lesson we’ve just taught the Camper.
We recently gave the Camper real life experience at making a decision. It was in relation to an event that happens every single day of her life. Her approach was to see how she felt just before the event each day, and we had to adjust our responses to accommodate her.
Now we can tell you that even though the event itself was minor and mundane, the Camper’s capriciousness about it began to take its toll. And if we pushed on through and thwarted her - that is, we made the decision for her - we’d get one of the meltdowns that parents can only shudder at.
‘She wanted routine’ you might mutter. You’re right, she did. But she’s a forthright little character and just imposing a routine on her wasn’t working. We tried that.
So we taught her to make the decision.
We explained why it was important to us and the workings of the family that mundane, routine things ran smoothly.
We explained why it was important to her growth and capability.
We explained how important cooperation was in our family.
We explained clearly what we wanted from her.
We told her she needed to make a decision about what she was going to do each day.
We discussed her options with her.
We gave her a weekend to think and talk about it, before making her final choice.
We explained that her final choice would be it for a set period of time.
And just to make sure the point got across, we chose an extra-curricular activity, described how she relied on our cooperation to get her there, and explained that her willingness to cooperate each day would directly influence our cooperation. We didn’t threaten to stop the activity completely, but the risk for her was constant interruptions to it.
Bingo. While the preparation took a week or so, behaviour changed overnight. No kidding. And it’s stuck.
What’s happened of course is that the activity has become a habit. The Camper no longer spends any time ‘thinking’ about it, she just does it. We knew that, and Happy Camper has learned it. She’s learned some self-discipline. And we think we’ve started to teach her an important life lesson about expending her energy and emotion on the things that really matter. Gold stars all round.
Oh, and the lesson for the agency workers? If it’s a good placement, focus on the important stuff, and trust us to make some good decisions for the child.
We talked in our last post about teaching the Camper to have an opinion, and how having an opinion is pretty fundamental to making a decision.
We’re good at decisions. We’ve had lots of practice, and we are never short of an opinion on anything, funnily enough. But our willingness to take the lead was a source of tension with the private agency. We kept tripping over ‘the line’ drawn by the ‘experts’, and they weren’t giving up territory to anyone. You could argue that they thought they were doing their job. But we think they needed to learn the lesson we’ve just taught the Camper.
We recently gave the Camper real life experience at making a decision. It was in relation to an event that happens every single day of her life. Her approach was to see how she felt just before the event each day, and we had to adjust our responses to accommodate her.
Now we can tell you that even though the event itself was minor and mundane, the Camper’s capriciousness about it began to take its toll. And if we pushed on through and thwarted her - that is, we made the decision for her - we’d get one of the meltdowns that parents can only shudder at.
‘She wanted routine’ you might mutter. You’re right, she did. But she’s a forthright little character and just imposing a routine on her wasn’t working. We tried that.
So we taught her to make the decision.
We explained why it was important to us and the workings of the family that mundane, routine things ran smoothly.
We explained why it was important to her growth and capability.
We explained how important cooperation was in our family.
We explained clearly what we wanted from her.
We told her she needed to make a decision about what she was going to do each day.
We discussed her options with her.
We gave her a weekend to think and talk about it, before making her final choice.
We explained that her final choice would be it for a set period of time.
And just to make sure the point got across, we chose an extra-curricular activity, described how she relied on our cooperation to get her there, and explained that her willingness to cooperate each day would directly influence our cooperation. We didn’t threaten to stop the activity completely, but the risk for her was constant interruptions to it.
Bingo. While the preparation took a week or so, behaviour changed overnight. No kidding. And it’s stuck.
What’s happened of course is that the activity has become a habit. The Camper no longer spends any time ‘thinking’ about it, she just does it. We knew that, and Happy Camper has learned it. She’s learned some self-discipline. And we think we’ve started to teach her an important life lesson about expending her energy and emotion on the things that really matter. Gold stars all round.
Oh, and the lesson for the agency workers? If it’s a good placement, focus on the important stuff, and trust us to make some good decisions for the child.
Contact with birth families is good
We are in favour of contact with birth families – 100%.
There are many reasons why it is beneficial for a child to know their birth family. Here are some of them.
‘Who is my birth mum and/or my birth dad?’
Knowing my origins - It is very difficult for a child, particularly when they start to attend school and families are on the curriculum, to cope with a complete blank where a birth parent’s identity might be. As a carer you need an explanation that increases in detail as the child matures.
‘Why isn’t my hair dark brown like yours?’
A sense of identity - This can be important physically, as the child begins to want to emulate or be part of their second family.
‘I’m only living with you because my birth parent is a rock star’
A sense of reality – as a child grows older they may want to know why they are not with their birth family. Contact can help prevent a fantasy life evolving around a birth parent. This in turn may prevent any ‘play-offs’ between birth and second families. It can be quite devastating for an older child to meet a birth parent and experience their shortcomings. Acceptance from an early age is helpful.
‘Why did my birth parents give me up?'
Understanding and communication - An opportunity for child and birth parent to communicate on these issues can be good. It’s tricky territory, for a birth parent may not be prepared to answer the hard questions, or may be in complete denial about what actually happened and their responsibility for it. That in itself is a useful conversation for a trusted person to have with the child.
So what is the issue, for the child, around birth family contact?
BALANCE
You can completely undermine a child’s sense of security if contact with birth family overwhelms them and over-rides their daily life. Let’s state the obvious – access for a child who has a good chance of restitution with their birth family, should be very different to that of a child who has been put into the care of the Minister until they reach 18 years.
We believe that the PURPOSE of contact should be an item on any case plan.
The frequency of contact is usually covered, but we’ve not experienced an open and frank discussion about the purpose. We’ve seen this come unstuck when a worker thought they were meant to re-establish the child/birth parent relationship, when the appropriate purpose of access was to ‘maintain contact between child and birth parent’. There is a world of difference between those two objectives.
Understanding the purpose of contact will help you know how access should run.
We saw that world of difference played out in the behaviours of worker and birth parent. The workers pushed a level of interaction, and a set of rules, that alienated the child and increased her insecurity. It also resulted in a birth parent believing they had far more say in the child’s life than was the case. It was left to a more experienced worker to do damage control, and remind birth parent of the reality of the situation. It wouldn’t have happened if the issue had been discussed properly.
Understanding the purpose of contact will help you help the child manage their response to birth parent.
It will help you know which behaviours, from child and birth parent, to support, and what you should hose down. You know the child best, and you know what their life is now, so you are best placed to understand the impact access with a birth parent may have.
We’re going to have the purpose of access firmly on the agenda at our next case conference. We recommend that you discuss this with your worker until you are really clear about what it means. We think it is a useful discussion for any birth parent to participate in. And we especially recommend it as a discussion with any new worker who wants to change some aspect of access.
Posted by EssentialMum
There are many reasons why it is beneficial for a child to know their birth family. Here are some of them.
‘Who is my birth mum and/or my birth dad?’
Knowing my origins - It is very difficult for a child, particularly when they start to attend school and families are on the curriculum, to cope with a complete blank where a birth parent’s identity might be. As a carer you need an explanation that increases in detail as the child matures.
‘Why isn’t my hair dark brown like yours?’
A sense of identity - This can be important physically, as the child begins to want to emulate or be part of their second family.
‘I’m only living with you because my birth parent is a rock star’
A sense of reality – as a child grows older they may want to know why they are not with their birth family. Contact can help prevent a fantasy life evolving around a birth parent. This in turn may prevent any ‘play-offs’ between birth and second families. It can be quite devastating for an older child to meet a birth parent and experience their shortcomings. Acceptance from an early age is helpful.
‘Why did my birth parents give me up?'
Understanding and communication - An opportunity for child and birth parent to communicate on these issues can be good. It’s tricky territory, for a birth parent may not be prepared to answer the hard questions, or may be in complete denial about what actually happened and their responsibility for it. That in itself is a useful conversation for a trusted person to have with the child.
So what is the issue, for the child, around birth family contact?
BALANCE
You can completely undermine a child’s sense of security if contact with birth family overwhelms them and over-rides their daily life. Let’s state the obvious – access for a child who has a good chance of restitution with their birth family, should be very different to that of a child who has been put into the care of the Minister until they reach 18 years.
We believe that the PURPOSE of contact should be an item on any case plan.
The frequency of contact is usually covered, but we’ve not experienced an open and frank discussion about the purpose. We’ve seen this come unstuck when a worker thought they were meant to re-establish the child/birth parent relationship, when the appropriate purpose of access was to ‘maintain contact between child and birth parent’. There is a world of difference between those two objectives.
Understanding the purpose of contact will help you know how access should run.
We saw that world of difference played out in the behaviours of worker and birth parent. The workers pushed a level of interaction, and a set of rules, that alienated the child and increased her insecurity. It also resulted in a birth parent believing they had far more say in the child’s life than was the case. It was left to a more experienced worker to do damage control, and remind birth parent of the reality of the situation. It wouldn’t have happened if the issue had been discussed properly.
Understanding the purpose of contact will help you help the child manage their response to birth parent.
It will help you know which behaviours, from child and birth parent, to support, and what you should hose down. You know the child best, and you know what their life is now, so you are best placed to understand the impact access with a birth parent may have.
We’re going to have the purpose of access firmly on the agenda at our next case conference. We recommend that you discuss this with your worker until you are really clear about what it means. We think it is a useful discussion for any birth parent to participate in. And we especially recommend it as a discussion with any new worker who wants to change some aspect of access.
Posted by EssentialMum
More understanding can mean more insecurity
It’s a double-edged sword. An older child might be able to articulate what they feel, what they understand, and what they are confused about in their life and their circumstances. That’s great. But with this understanding comes understanding: there will be more questions about their circumstances, and perhaps more insecurity about what it really means. They might make their own judgment about what they want.
So you may suddenly find you have a small person who doesn’t want to see birth family. A small person who doesn’t want to have a ‘birth parent’. A small person who doesn’t want to be different from their friends.
But the ‘system’ or the ‘research’ will tell you it is good for them to know their birth family. That maintaining contact is positive – that they won’t create some fantasy life surrounding birth family. That reality, however relentless, is good.
For once, let’s put ourselves in the shoes of one of these small people.
Imagine this:
You’ve been moved around a lot since you were born. You’re a resilient kid, so on a day-to-day basis, you manage to smile and laugh and make it look like you are OK. So you’ve learned to be very affectionate, very quickly, with any new people you meet. You take whatever gets thrown at you because you’ve learned that’s how you survive. You might still bang your head on the pillow occasionally at night, because that makes you feel better, but no one hears.
You’re a smart kid: you are very tuned in and hyper-aware of what’s going on around you. In many ways you are much older than your years. You are really quite grateful that you’ve arrived at what seems to be a good place – the parents are nice and reasonable and give you a sense that they know how to deal. You try and show how grateful you are. They hug you and tell you that they are happy too, but you’re not sure they really understand how you feel.
But nothing changes over time, and you get to know them better. They are always the same, and you start to cautiously rely on them. And in there somewhere is a funny feeling. You see it in their eyes when they look at you. And you feel it too. You start to really like their hugs and kisses. Their support and approval feels really good. You like school and have some good mates. One day, you begin to hope that this is how it is going to be.
You see your birth family. That’s been fine, up until the last few times when your birth parent started telling you that you were still part of their family and not to forget it. You tried to shrug it off, but birth parent kept telling you every time you saw them. You mentioned it to your foster parents. They said that no one is taking you anywhere. But you’ve had a few nightmares recently where your birth parent came and took you away. You are really not sure that you want to see your birth family at the moment. Maybe you could take a break from them?
Can you imagine that? How would you feel?
Posted by EssentialMum
So you may suddenly find you have a small person who doesn’t want to see birth family. A small person who doesn’t want to have a ‘birth parent’. A small person who doesn’t want to be different from their friends.
But the ‘system’ or the ‘research’ will tell you it is good for them to know their birth family. That maintaining contact is positive – that they won’t create some fantasy life surrounding birth family. That reality, however relentless, is good.
For once, let’s put ourselves in the shoes of one of these small people.
Imagine this:
You’ve been moved around a lot since you were born. You’re a resilient kid, so on a day-to-day basis, you manage to smile and laugh and make it look like you are OK. So you’ve learned to be very affectionate, very quickly, with any new people you meet. You take whatever gets thrown at you because you’ve learned that’s how you survive. You might still bang your head on the pillow occasionally at night, because that makes you feel better, but no one hears.
You’re a smart kid: you are very tuned in and hyper-aware of what’s going on around you. In many ways you are much older than your years. You are really quite grateful that you’ve arrived at what seems to be a good place – the parents are nice and reasonable and give you a sense that they know how to deal. You try and show how grateful you are. They hug you and tell you that they are happy too, but you’re not sure they really understand how you feel.
But nothing changes over time, and you get to know them better. They are always the same, and you start to cautiously rely on them. And in there somewhere is a funny feeling. You see it in their eyes when they look at you. And you feel it too. You start to really like their hugs and kisses. Their support and approval feels really good. You like school and have some good mates. One day, you begin to hope that this is how it is going to be.
You see your birth family. That’s been fine, up until the last few times when your birth parent started telling you that you were still part of their family and not to forget it. You tried to shrug it off, but birth parent kept telling you every time you saw them. You mentioned it to your foster parents. They said that no one is taking you anywhere. But you’ve had a few nightmares recently where your birth parent came and took you away. You are really not sure that you want to see your birth family at the moment. Maybe you could take a break from them?
Can you imagine that? How would you feel?
Posted by EssentialMum
'I am a foster child'
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
When is a fairy a good thing?
There was an interesting article in the SMH (Weekend Edition, August 16-17 2008) from Lisa Pryor. She was responding to an article in the Age regarding a new book – The Great Feminist Denial – where the author decries letting preschool girls dress as fairies, princesses and ballerinas at birthday parties.
The author, Monica Dux, argues that this just entrenches a narrow view of femininity, focussed on appearance.
As a family with Cinderella, Angelina Ballerina, Snow White, and a number of unnamed fairies in our repertoire, we’d like to share our approach.
It’s all about balance.
We do ballet, so the wonders of the costumes and all that pink stuff are beautifully balanced by the physical activity. Happy Camper understands that ballet is about action and control and exercise. Snow White has been elevated to a superhero in our house, on a par with Spiderman and Superman.
The fairy outfits are usually layered over other clothes, to very funny effect. The froufrou glamour fairy outfit, worn over flannelette pyjamas, topped with a hat and scarf, accessorised with a pair of sunglasses and a bag and finished off with ugh boots, is hysterical. It’s all about dressing up and creating a look, and is usually part of an elaborate imaginative game. The brighter and shinier the outfit, the more Happy Camper loves it.
Dux offers that girls should be ‘active young things seeking out adventure'. We agree - on a daily basis we swim, ride scooters and bikes, kick a soccer ball around a park, wrestle, climb trees, walk dogs, garden. Happy Camper has no qualms about heading to the top of a climbing frame many metres high.
Happy Camper has also been encouraged to have a go at lots of things. It requires some clever risk management in the background naturally, but feeds her confidence and fuels her interest in trying more. She has manned a dodgem car (peeling EssentialMum’s fingers from the steering wheel when we tried to avoid hitting the edge), swung on a sixty foot professional trapeze with a grin on her face, had a go at several climbing walls, bucketed down any giant slide available (the higher the better), ridden horses from Shetlands to 15 hands, and watched in frustrated tears because she was too short to go on the G-force Rocket Ride with the adults.
So we don’t mind the fairy outfits. They are only one part of her imagination and life experience. If she’s still wearing them at fifteen, then we’ll worry.
Posted by EssentialMum
The author, Monica Dux, argues that this just entrenches a narrow view of femininity, focussed on appearance.
As a family with Cinderella, Angelina Ballerina, Snow White, and a number of unnamed fairies in our repertoire, we’d like to share our approach.
It’s all about balance.
We do ballet, so the wonders of the costumes and all that pink stuff are beautifully balanced by the physical activity. Happy Camper understands that ballet is about action and control and exercise. Snow White has been elevated to a superhero in our house, on a par with Spiderman and Superman.
The fairy outfits are usually layered over other clothes, to very funny effect. The froufrou glamour fairy outfit, worn over flannelette pyjamas, topped with a hat and scarf, accessorised with a pair of sunglasses and a bag and finished off with ugh boots, is hysterical. It’s all about dressing up and creating a look, and is usually part of an elaborate imaginative game. The brighter and shinier the outfit, the more Happy Camper loves it.
Dux offers that girls should be ‘active young things seeking out adventure'. We agree - on a daily basis we swim, ride scooters and bikes, kick a soccer ball around a park, wrestle, climb trees, walk dogs, garden. Happy Camper has no qualms about heading to the top of a climbing frame many metres high.
Happy Camper has also been encouraged to have a go at lots of things. It requires some clever risk management in the background naturally, but feeds her confidence and fuels her interest in trying more. She has manned a dodgem car (peeling EssentialMum’s fingers from the steering wheel when we tried to avoid hitting the edge), swung on a sixty foot professional trapeze with a grin on her face, had a go at several climbing walls, bucketed down any giant slide available (the higher the better), ridden horses from Shetlands to 15 hands, and watched in frustrated tears because she was too short to go on the G-force Rocket Ride with the adults.
So we don’t mind the fairy outfits. They are only one part of her imagination and life experience. If she’s still wearing them at fifteen, then we’ll worry.
Posted by EssentialMum