It's nice to have good news for once (or twice), especially when it relates to kids.
The number of youth being placed in foster care has dropped for the sixth year in a row, reportsThe Associated Press, bringing the number of children and teens in temporary homes to about 400,000. That's down by one fifth, from over half a million ten years ago.
The dramatic decrease is primarily due to changes in the practices of state welfare agencies. More have streamlined the adoption process and broadened preventative support to troubled families, hoping to avoid the necessity of foster placement to begin with.
National progress was uneven, however. While New York and Pennsylvania saw large declines in the number of youth requiring placement, the AP observes, the southern states of Florida and Georgia actually experienced an increase.
Via The Associated Press.
I guess that many of those who would normally give their kids up for adoption are instead keeping them in an effort to beef up their entitlement-benefits...big surprise, there. I wonder if any of those folks are getting creative when it comes to naming all of them? "This is my oldest, DirecTV, and then we have DSL, XBOXLive, Cricket, DodgeNeon, and our new baby, iPad."
This is a tough question but I like that it gives us a break from all of the clinical thinking.
I'd like to think that I would at the very least consider fostering a child, but I know it's a really tough lifestyle on kids and would probably have a very hard time bringing a kid into our everyday lifestyle without feeling like I needed to explain why that situation couldn't become permanent for them. There are some really great foster care families out there, but at the end of the day - the more we can do to make adoption an easier process for all involved, the better.
If I was in the position, financially and domestically, I'd be happy to offer a good home to a child, or children. However, like Beta, I'd rather be able to provide a permanent, stable, secure environment. Foster care has to be heartbreaking for both good kids and good adults. And a lot of foster children develop difficulties adapting to both childhood and adulthood. Ironic that you have to take a test and have a license to drive a car, but not to be a parent. Perhaps if people could be required to take classes, pass a test, have a license to be parents, there'd be less need of foster parents.
Really Neo!? You think I'd be a bad parent because I'm Gay!? Care to elaborate? And please use FACTS, not FICTION.*
*Side note: My heterosexual friend has taught his 3 year old son to yell, "Chunky booty," every time he sees a female with a nice butt! He's also convinced that his son is going to be Gay because he has blond hair!*
"Both his grading standards and his refusal to try to be politically correct increased my respect for him."
I never had the pleasure of taking a class by either men but they're refusal to be politically correct has increased my respect for both of them.
Here's a video of the two together debating with Francis Fox Piven and some British Guy. In it they discuss what the nature of a "welfare state" should be. And that would include "wards of the state". So I guess that makes it on topic too.