Kinship care PMC

If the kids are in state custody now, and it sounds like that's what you're saying, and if it comes to permanent custody, it won't be YOU taking the kids away from mom. The kids are ALREADY removed from Mom's custody, by the state. The STATE is making the decision as to where the kids will be permanently. If you can't take permenant custody then alternatives will be explored - by the state - with little or no input from Mom, since she doesn't have custody of the kids. If they're looking for alternate places for the kids it's because Mom isn't able to complete the case plan set up for her, or for some other reason is not able to have custody of the kids returned to her. Just because the state is exploring other options besides reunification doesn't mean that reunification is not going to happen, just that they are working on a concurrent plan, as the law dictates. The cw's are likely looking for a plan that is least disruptive to the child(ren). If the kids can stay in the current home it is generally viewed to be better than moving the kid(s) to another home, or possible a couple more, until the right fit is found.I had a friend who took permanent custody (guardianship) instead of adoption. There were some downsides in that they didn't get some of the same services that they would have if the child was in foster care, or possibly even adopted. It depends on the state; some states don't offer subsidies to relative adoption placements, or other services after the adoption is final. It might be prudent to either consult with an attorney (probably an adoption attorney?) and/or talk with other families, perhaps through a relative adoption support group in your area. You can ask them questions and get some info from someone besides the state cw's. There are often classes for 'grandparent adoption' (even if you aren't the grandparent, it's relative adoption) and support groups. You'll get some info from other people's experiences, and often can find resources that aren't obvious.Not sure if this is all that helpful. :o Sorry.

THANKS for the reply... right now we're in a limbo land... they're not in state custody. Their mom still has custody, they're just placed with us (family and friend) while she's trying to get her stuff done. I found a few supports for the kids, through the state PMC program, but there's not a lot. I am not sure that the person who is caring for the kids, is ready/able to do so in a permanant way due to health issues... so that's why we're being asked if we would be interested. right now all teh kids know that they're "still their mom's kids" and that their mom still has custody of them. My concern would be how to explain to them, that we're filing for custody in a way that's not detrimental to them.

My niece was in state custody, so I travelled a different path. support varies state to state.. the faqs for relative careivers in my stare are here as an example: [url]http://www.nhfapa.org/images/categoryItems/A_Resource_Guide_for_NH_Relative_Caregivers_Form_21611294892433.pdf[/url] What you'll need to figure out - can you care without subsidies and or health insurance? Can you mediate the relationship with your godchild's parents? are there any conditions they need to agree to before getting the child back? the main difference between any kinship vs str8 foster is the relationship with the BPs. Your relationship with them will forever change. welcome to the world of kinship :D

Yeah, i've discovered that kinship care is the hell level of the foster system... we have all the responsibilities with none or very little support, resources or even authority. Getting him signed up for school was A LOT of fun. The school dist had a power of attny form we did, so we have power of attny with school and medical but mom still keeps custody. It's my understanding that if we do the PMC, where we file for custody, the kids will keep their medicaid. If we have custody, we can put them on our ins... but I'm not sure how much that'll cost. I think we can make it without subsidies, but you bring up a good point... I guess I just assumed since we were looking to adopt in this age range all was good. Now that you say that, I see it was kind of a silly assumption. :) I saw that there's two levels of PMC- one where they terminate parental rights and one where they dont. IF they don't do a TPR, then we'd always have to know the parents can try to come back at any time and try to get custody back. The other way says they can't. Both options list that parents may have to pay child support, but I dont see that as being likely. The caseworker originally wanted the kids to just stay here, until we determined the mom was ready to have them back. I think that's a HORRIBLE idea. I dont wanna have to be the one to determine if she's ready or the one who's "keeping her from her kids". In our foster training, i heard that kids feel this way a lot when the caregivers actually have no part in the decision... i can't imagine how hard it'd be if we actually were the ones to make that decision. I don't mean to sound selfish, and that i only want the easy path... but that just seems like a lot to ask. I think the part that jus drives me nuts, is the idea that these kids are being asked ot live in limbo and keep being "no one's kids". I want them to have more than just a place to stay, i want them to belong and thrive and be part of a family where they're loved and accepted. at least with PMC, they'd belong some place and get to work on getting back to life, and actually relax some place. :hippie:

I can see through your posts where some things are becoming more clear to you but also some parts where they aren't. Their mother DOES NOT have custody of them. Her parental rights are intact, but the state has custody of them. That means that although she has not lost her parental rights, the court has stopped/restricted her from exercising some of them. If you take guardianship with no TPR, the situation would be the same except you would be in the state's role having custody. Then you would have the "power" to return or not return the children. The foster case closes but the custody case would remain open and you might find yourself fighting it. It sounds as if you don't want that. If you take guardianship with TPR, then the custody case is closed. If you adopt after TPR, then the custody case is closed. It would not be surprising if the state were trying to get you to agree to guardianship with no TPR. They don't want the custody case and its costs any more than you do; they are happy to hand it and responsibility for the child over to you. It sounds as if you need to learn a lot more about your state's laws and practices regarding guardianship and kinship/foster placements, placement preferences and priorities, subsidies, services, etc. Check out the state statutes for child abuse and prevention on the Child Welfare Information Gateway online. It is an excellent government site with a lot of good information. If you can't find the right web page, let me know and I'll post the link. As for how to plan--the child has to go forward in all things as if where he is is his home and will be. He cannot stall his life because of his parents' issues. That's why he is with you--so that that won't happen. If things change, they change; you all will have to deal with that as best you can if it happens. Besides, it shouldn't affect class selection, which is pretty straightforward in high school anyway. Good luck to you and them. It helps if they are older and happy where they are. They most likely have some statutory right to have their wishes considered and many judges will respect that.

Thanks for the reply, Handley. The CPS caseworker keeps stressing to us that the mom still has custody of the kids. When we picked him up from his mom, the day CPS called us, we got no papers even saying he was staying with us. The only thing we is what the school district had us fill out, giving us power of attorney with school and medical stuff. That's one of the irritating parts to me, is that CPS seems to be looking at it like we're just babysitting or something. I don't see this as babysitting at all. I was trying to explain to my godson that we're going to plan on him going to school here and taking classes next year, until we hear otherwise. He seemed unsure. I tried validating that I know he's planning on going home, but until then, we're going ot go ahead and plan for him to be here and then when he moves we'll change the plan. It was one of htose times when I knew there had to be a better thing to say, i just didnt know what it was. :D

IMO you need an attorney. If you didn't have the child in your home, and mom had him with her, would CPS remove him and place him in state care (foster home) under their custody? Sounds as though this would be the case. You need someone who can look at the particular specifics of your case, in your state, and who can help you negotiate through all the legalities in the best possible way for the child and everyone else involved.Even IF you do adopt or take guardianship, or whatever term it comes out as, you can maintain contact with mom - unless she's a danger to the child for some reason (physical or emotional). Your godson could live with you until he's able to live independently, and still be his mother's son, but it will take patience and understanding on all sides.

OK, I'm sorry, I can see now how that could be...the state has made and succeeded in "reasonable efforts" to avoid foster care by allowing the mother to say the boy could go with you before/without taking him into custody. I think that it proceeds much like a foster case except that instead of having custody as leverage, the state has the threat of taking custody as leverage to encourage compliance with services? I think I get it now. I don't have any firsthand knowledge of a situation like this, maybe someone else does. I would talk with a few attorneys if I were you. If your state never takes custody, then you would not get a subsidized guardianship. If you take PMC/guardianship directly from the mother, however, you might be able to apply for welfare benefits for the children as households of one. That is, benefits like TANFF (different name now?) and SCHIP (Medicaid)would be calculated based on their individual incomes and assets. I would think that she and the childrens' father should be paying you child support now. Good luck with everything, I hope it works out well.

Sooooo, I talked to the CPS caseworker this week, and thanks to budget cuts and procedure changes from the state level... kids are going to have to go back home within 90days of being removed unless there's pretty much a gauranteed of a danger to their safety. SOOOO, that said, it looks like the boys are headed back to mom. talk about emotional whiplash!!! course, i'm not going to count on it until we get the call to actually take him home and drop him off. :eek:

Ugh! I'm so sorry. There's a huge grey area between neglect and actional neglect. This hurts a lot of kids. We are experiencing this right now. My DD's brother (also my nephew) is in this boat. A family member actually called in a complint to DCYF over the weekend. Had she asked me, i wouldn't have told her not to bother. Its so frustrating. EVERYONE in the family (outside the home) sees this kid on a crash course. But the neglect doesn't rise to imminient threat, so there's nothnig the state can do. There's no more helpless a feeling that watching a relative child in need and being unable to help *hugs*