Economy and foster care

it's the same here. 'cut the number of kids in foster care by 50%'! it's unethical. the better solution might be to decrease the amount of time kids stay in teh system. if the parents don't work their plan, terminate sooner, don't let it drag for months.

The state adoption subsidy has been totally cut as of Jan 1st. The push for in home services has been growing anyway but I've heard of many foster parents in my area who are empty or not getting any calls. We are full but we have 2 different sibling groups that are not going anywhere. I heard one of the judges said 200 kids were to be sent home before the end of the year (08) I haven't heard if that happened, but I'm sure it did. The effects of the economy will hit the foster community hard all over.

And all this time I thought the economy was going to cause more kids to come into care. This is another way the government to chickening out on responsibles.

Our foster care news letter mentioned that they want to cut back on the cost of medicare for foster children...so what are they expecting of us? If a child needs medical care, whether they are mine or not, I am going to seek it out. not to mention that a lot of these kids have had their medical needs neglected up until they came into care and trully need it now.

Bad news for the vulnerable kids. My foster care cw said bad economies usually mean more kids in care. now they're reversing that trend.

The economy gets bad and who takes the hit? Kids, because they don't vote! In Georgia the powers-that-be have already started on:Education: Freeze teacher salaries, ask teachers to give back already promised raises, increase class sizes by 4 students (from 16 - 20), and cut down on free school bus service.Health: Freeze enrollment in PeachCare for KidsServices: Freeze hiring and do not fill empty positions of social workers, school nurses, speech therapists, ESOL teachers, and others.Due to the lack of social workers there are not enough for the foster parent orientation classes, which have been canceled and not rescheduled. As foster homes drop out, due to economy, adoption, etc. there will be no one trained to fill in the gaps.Our glorious governor has canceled the building of two children's shelters but has kept money in the budget for a giant (18 acre) fishpond in his home county and all the roads we could want!It makes me really want to go to the press and ask for news articles, but then I wonder -- would anyone care, except people like us? Are there enough people like us to make a difference?

Hello MamaS, what not try, what could be the worse to happen? I have been told by a couple of people why kids don't get the help they need or the reason why they are allowed to be treated the way they are and nothing be done; is b/c they are still be considered as property like they were in the old days. I know that the government is smart enough to know if they give up on the kids now that they give up on a bright future. But they don't care b/c their futures are already set and the problems they are causing seems to be under them. Let us know what we can do and we'll see how many people care. This is one of the main reason we do it, it sure in the h@%% isn't for the money.

I was told by a licensing specialist that only 1 child was taken into care during the month of December! I'm close to getting my license and now I wonder if I should have even bothered since they are no longer placing children! All that effort, time, & money for what? These poor children!!

It won't stay like this. Laws are always changing, economy goes up and down. It might be a bit of a wait, but you will eventually be needed. Don't be discouraged. Sad to say, but as more children die as a result of abuse, the heat will get turned up on DCS and attentions will refocus on the kids' welfare.I've seen it swing from one extreme to the other and I'm not really very old. Changes are always happening!

That is exactly what I am afraid of...... children having to suffer and/or die in order for DCF to realize that you cannot make the issue of child abuse go away. Who are they kidding? I just wonder what goes through the mind of the investigator when they make the decision to keep a child in an unsafe environment. I know that they are trying to meet a quota (50% reduction by 2012, intake has already been decreased by 44%). A 2 year old child in my city did die a couple of months ago and the newspaper reported that there were 6 reported incidents prior. Why wasn't that child removed? I don't get it!!