LESSENING THE STING OF ASFA: THE REHABILITATION‐RELAPSE DILEMMA BROUGHT ABOUT BY DRUG ADDICTION AND TERMINATION OF PARENTAL RIGHTS

Congress passed the Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA) as a response to children waiting in foster homes for years without permanent placement. In addressing the problem of permanency, however, Congress set a strict limit on how long a child could be in foster care (15 out of the most recent 22 months) before a state must either commence a proceeding to terminate parental rights or else lose valuable federal funding. Due to health care funding schemes and quality of treatment, this requirement, in particular, negatively impacts parents currently in drug rehabilitation whose parental rights may be permanently terminated before a realistic chance to recover is permitted. Although ASFA requires that states make “reasonable efforts” to keep families united, it does not define “reasonable efforts,” leaving parental rights and family unity subject to a chaotic interpretation of this requirement from state to state. “Reasonable efforts” should be interpreted to take into account current drug addiction and recovery research and drug court programs should be used to facilitate this goal. Research has shown that focusing on adequate treatment saves states money and improves the lives of children and their families, reducing the need for reliance on termination of parental rights.     

WHEN JAIL FAILS: AMENDING THE ASFA TO REDUCE ITS NEGATIVE IMPACT ON CHILDREN OF INCARCERATED PARENTS

The Adoption and Safe Families Act (ASFA) requires states begin termination proceedings when a child resides in foster care for fifteen out of the last twenty‐two months. Many states interpret this to mean that an incarcerated parent is unfit when they leave their child in foster care just because they are separated from their children. Parents and children can still have meaningful relationships even when separated. Thus, parental unfitness should depend on many factors such as the relationship with the child, age of the child, and ability to provide support for the child—not just the time spent away from the child. This Note advocates for the amendment of ASFA to include factors courts should consider when terminating the parental rights of incarcerated parents and encouraged states to focus not on a time frame for termination, but rather consideration of circumstances relevant to each individual family. States should incorporate the factors into their state laws. Further, states should actively work with prisoners and their children to help maintain contact and if possible, reunify families after incarcerations. These services will help prevent the need for termination after a parent completes their sentence and will help to reduce recidivism.     

Transferring custody from birth parents to foster parents – an ambiguous matter

In this study, we analyse 32 district court decisions regarding custody transfers from the birth parents to the foster parents in Sweden. When a child has been in foster care for three years, in order to enhance stability for child, the local social welfare committee considers a transferral of custody to the foster parents following an application to the district court. Although all but one of the decisions in our study favoured a custody transfer, the courts acknowledge different reasons for this. Specifically, there is vagueness about whether or not functioning contact between the child and birth parents is a hindrance in custody transfer. Our findings stress the need for clarification in the law regarding the criteria for custody transfer in order to reach a more unified judgment. Furthermore, the district courts do not sufficiently acknowledge children’s views, and we suggest that children and young people should be made more visible in the decision-making process.     

Minors,gender, and family: The discourses in the court system of traditional Buenos Aires

The article deals with public attitudes toward family responsibility in early-nineteenth-century Bienos Aires, particularly as revealed in lawsuits occasioned by disputes over the custody of minors. The care and education of minors was ordinarily entrusted to parents, but death, incapacity, licentious conduct, poverty or abandonment often resulted in the minor being removed from parents and taken by others into custody of guardians or institutions of public welfare. The majority of the analyzed lawsuits resulted from an attempt by parents to recover their authority over their children. The lawsuits indicate that the racial, gender, social, and generational “disadvantages” of plaintiffs did not a priori determine the judgement, but rather that arguments for family stability frequently were decisive when heard by sympathetic judges. Disadvantages persons thus frequently argued sucessfully about the meaning of the family, as protagonists in the legal system that otherwise often marginalized them.     

BARRIERS TO REUNIFICATION FOR INCARCERATED PARENTS—A JUDICIAL PERSPECTIVE

Within the child welfare system, going to jail does not automatically mean losing your children. As the number of incarcerated parents rises, California dependency bench officers are looking at the effects incarceration has on parents seeking to reunify with their children. The California legislature passed legislation allowing a dependency judicial officer to consider the effect incarceration has on parents' performance and to grant additional reunification if a parent's progress is hindered by incarceration. In Los Angeles County, the Incarcerated Parents Working Group was specifically created in 2009 to look at the services available to incarcerated parents and what barriers these parents face in their efforts to reunify. Additionally, the working group has created judicial training on this subject for their bench officers and for other judicial officers throughout the state.     

The Adoption and Safe Families Act: Proposing a “Best Efforts” Standard to Eliminate the Ultimate Obstacle for Family Reunification

The Adoption and Safe Families Act of 1997 (ASFA) was enacted in an attempt to expedite the child's permanency plan by pushing for adoption of children in foster care. The ASFA requires the U.S. Department of Health to make reasonable efforts to reunify and preserve existing families while rewarding the states for increased adoption of foster care children. The ASFA was enacted to ensure the best interests of the child are to remain paramount, but in practice, the ASFA is furthering the best interests of the state. This Note proposes amendment of the ASFA to increase the obligation of the Department of Social Services (DSS) to make its best efforts to preserve and reunify the existing family unit, while also imposing a penalty if the DSS fails to do so.     

Ensuring Insurance for Foster Care: Requiring Foster Parents to Obtain Liability Insurance to Cover Harm Done to Foster Children in their Care

This Note proposes that all states should require that foster parents have liability insurance before children are placed in their care. This Note also proposes that the liability insurance needs to cover not just harm to third parties but also harm to the foster children through the negligent acts of the foster parents. This legislation will allow foster children to have standing to bring claims against their foster parents and insurance companies and give them a greater opportunity for recovery. Currently, the policies and statutes governing the policies in place do not cover all types of harm that can occur during the foster parent–child relationship. Certain policies leave children who are harmed by their foster parents’ negligence unable to recover any damages from the people who have harmed them. Because foster parents can be left to defend the actions themselves, they often become judgment proof due to their low income, leaving the children who are harmed with little chance of recovery.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• States need to require foster parents to obtain liability insurance, which covers harm done by the foster children to third parties, harm to the home, and any harm done to the child by the foster parents.

     

THE FOSTER CARE OMBUDSMAN: APPLYING AN INTERNATIONAL CONCEPT TO HELP PREVENT INSTITUTIONAL ABUSE OF AMERICA'S FOSTER YOUTH

Children today are often abused while in foster care, undermining the theoretical goal of the modern foster care system: to create a temporary, safe, homelike setting to protect and nurture children who are unable to live with their biological parents due to various reasons such as abuse, neglect, or abandonment. Often this abuse is worse than the type for which they were removed from their parents’ care in the first place. First examining the reasons why this complex problem exists, this Note recommends an internationally based, innovative concept as a partial solution: the foster care ombudsman. This Note explains the concept of an ombudsman and demonstrates how it can be particularly helpful to foster children, highlighting existing child welfare ombudsman offices in California, Rhode Island, and New Jersey, as well as international approaches. It also illustrates how a foster care ombudsman can complement class action litigation of foster care abuse claims.     

The foster family in Poland,a custodial and educational environment (XX – the early XXI centuries)

ABSTRACT

A thorough study of the sources made it possible to conduct a retrospective analysis as well as outline normative and legal principles of the foster family in Poland as one of the main forms of child custody in the XX – early XXI centuries rooted in national traditions and social legacy. Foster family formation and early functioning indicate that its value depends on who is entrusted with a child to care for, what child is to be placed in foster care, what kind of support a foster family could expect, what control is exercised over it. The second half of the XX – the early XXI centuries mark the evolution of the legal and regulatory framework underlying foster care, one of the main institutional forms of child custody in Poland. It appears that the foster family provides a child with proper living conditions and a favourable environment for its education and socialisation, closest possible to those in a natural family. To this end, the state is to make sure that potential foster parents are properly trained. The development of foster care speeds up in the 1970’s and 1990’s. We have discovered that at the turn of the century, foster family functioning, provision of care and adequate conditions for a child’s development and upbringing etc. are defined by the social policy of the state. Of great significance for the international community is the Polish experience regarding the requirements for foster family candidates, children’s placement in such families, material assistance, foster parent salary calculations; the amount of money biological parents must pay for their child’s placement in a foster family. In modern Poland the foster family is an important social institution which promotes the development of a child deprived of parental care and is prioritized over other institutional forms of care.     

Families of Origin,Foster Care Experience,and the Transition to Adulthood

The rising number of young adults transitioning to adulthood from the foster care system has been a focus of prior research. The current study explored foster care youths transitions to adulthood to identify factors that contribute to or inhibit prosocial adult outcomes. Structured data derived from interviews with foster care‐experienced adults and child welfare professionals as well as focus groups with foster care‐experienced adults and foster parents were analyzed using content analysis to examine the transition to adulthood from foster care. Positive or negative life outcomes resulted from two key mechanisms: a) issues related to family of origin (inadequate parenting, abuse); and b) foster care experiences (including a pattern of “drift”). We explore disidentification, a new social psychological concept. Throughout, key players provide policy recommendations for the child welfare system.     

Unintended and Unavoidable: The Failure to Protect Rule and Its Consequences for Undocumented Parents and Their Children

Parents without immigration status in the United States regularly face the threat of deportation and separation from their children. When an undocumented parent is brought to the attention of law enforcement through the child welfare system, they also face the potential of the loss of legal custodial rights to their children. The child welfare system and immigration enforcement mechanisms operate independent of one another with little regard for how actions in one can impact a parent's legal rights in the other, often permanently separating children from their parents. This article examines the particular issue of undocumented parents who are charged with the failure to protect their children from witnessing or otherwise experiencing abuse committed by a third party. It explores how such a charge, whether founded or unfounded, can result in loss of eligibility for immigration relief to which the undocumented parent would otherwise be entitled, as well as deportation of the parent and permanent separation of parent and child. These issues are situated within the larger context of the normative guideposts of both family and immigration law, namely, the best interests of the child and family unity. It identifies issues for further academic inquiry as well as tips for practitioners who may represent undocumented parents in either the family or immigration systems.

Key Points for the Family Court Community:
• Learn about the potential consequences under family law and immigration law when an undocumented parent's child is abused by a third party
• Gain strategies for planning with undocumented parents to avoid the loss of the custody of their children in the event of a sudden deportation
• Be able to identify and address particular concerns for clients who are undocumented victims of domestic violence

     

Who needs Daddy Warbucks: The Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program should apply to children of those who surrender their parental rights

Families who find themselves in the middle of child protective proceedings have three possible outcomes: (1) the family can reunify; (2) parents voluntarily surrender their parental rights; or (3) the parents have their rights terminated. While it seems we should support children in the second and third scenarios equally, having funding sources such as the Kinship Guardianship Assistance Program (KinGAP) only available to children of parents whose rights are terminated, does the opposite. This Note proposes amending the eligibility requirements of KinGAP to include children of parents who surrender their parental rights which would encourage positive safe placements for children.     

未成年子女利益之保护:意大利法的经验与借鉴

意大利是深受罗马法家父权传统影响的国家,未成年子女一直处于弱势的法律地位。经过理论界若干年的讨论与酝酿,1975年意大利修订了民法典中关于家庭法的部分。非婚生子女与婚生子女的法律地位实现了有限平等化。承认父母子女的利益是各自独立的,而且在存在利益冲突的情况下,诸多的司法判决都认可子女的意愿优先。监护权的行使,受到公权力的监督,无论是剥夺父母的监护权,还是临时性的收养,在监护障碍消除之后,往往还是鼓励孩子回归其原来的家庭。在保护未成年子女利益上,司法积极介入家事特别是父母与子女之间的关系,这点对深受传统思想影响的中国家庭尤其具有借鉴意义。     

UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF BARGAINING FOR ADOPTION ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS

Families that adopt children who are in foster care may receive monthly adoption assistance payments to offset the cost of raising the adopted child. The amount of the adoption assistance payment is the subject of bargaining between the family and the child welfare authority. This article uses a bargaining model to highlight factors that, in addition to the expected costs of raising the child, might influence the outcome of bargaining over adoption assistance payments. Findings indicate that married parents who adopt children already in their care have an advantage in bargaining, and single women who adopt their kin or foster children have a disadvantage in bargaining.     

All hat and no cattle: How house bill 2926 paves the way for progress in the reinstatement of parental rights,but falls short of providing parents with an accessible resource

Texas' foster care system is overpopulated, underfunded, and doing a grave disservice to the children in its care. Specifically, the foster care system is violating the constitutional rights of children regarding how they must be taken care of while in the State's custody. Parents whose custodial rights were involuntarily terminated now have a clear path for petitioning to regain their rights thanks to Texas House Bill 2926. Much of House Bill 2926's value is lost in the legalese used to write it, which is the problem my proposed solution, The 2926 Project, aims to remedy.     

New York State of Mind: Parental Incarceration and Children's Visitation in New York State

The incarceration of a parent has a variety of negative effects on a child's psychological, academic, and developmental success. Children can end up in foster care as a result of the state terminating parental rights due to the parent's incarceration. Despite imprisonment of their parent(s), maintenance of visitation with the parent(s) is still important for their children. However, not all prisons have visitation programs that are suitable to visiting children. This Note proposes a model state statute that will recognize the importance of visitation, implement “child friendly” visitation programs, facilitate training for prison staff, and provide transportation for children in major cities to the prison facilities.     

“I WANT MY MOMMIES”: THE CRY FOR MINI‐DOMAS TO RECOGNIZE THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILDREN OF SAME‐SEX COUPLES*

In child custody cases, courts will look to the best interests of a child to maintain visitation/custody rights only with the child's biological parent, not third parties. However, with a same‐sex couple, it is inevitable that one parent will not be the biological parent. Thus, when that parent is in a mini‐DOMA state, where same‐sex couples from non‐mini‐DOMA states do not have to be recognized, that parent will be viewed as a third party and lose all visitation/custody rights if the couple separates. This note advocates that mini‐DOMAs allow both the biological and nonbiological parents of a same‐sex couple to have visitation/custody rights of their children if it would be in the best interest of the children to do so.     

They Persist: Parent and Youth Voice in the Age of Trump

In recent decades, parents and youth involved in the child welfare and foster care systems have created myriad ways to have their voices heard and their concerns appreciated, including through collective self‐advocacy efforts. New forms of individual and communal advocacy have emerged, including with supportive professionals, that acknowledge the centrality of parents and youth in every decision being made about their lives and about the systems that control their lives. Nevertheless, studies of youth and parent engagement identify the numerous individual and systemic barriers to meaningful participation and self‐advocacy efforts and the challenges to overcoming those barriers. This essay explores how empowered parents and youth can surmount those barriers with the assistance of their professional allies. Ultimately, this individual and communal engagement will strengthen a family‐oriented child welfare system and a more responsive government in these uncertain times.     

Visit Coaching: Building on Family Strengths to Meet Children's Needs

Visits between children in foster care and their families often do not build on family strengths or help them demonstrate they can meet their children's safety and developmental needs. Visits can alienate parents, children, and foster parents, and the parent's grief, anger, and preoccupation with complying with court‐ordered treatment often obscure their children's needs. Visit coaching is an innovative approach that can replace parenting classes and office‐based visits with hands‐on guidance for families in meeting their children's needs. The visit coach, who may be their caseworker or a variety of other trained individuals, helps parents take charge of visits and demonstrate more responsiveness to each child.     

Through the Eyes of a Father: How PRWORA Affects Non-Resident Fathers and Their Children

Under the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity ReconciliationAct (PRWORA), new laws have been enacted that focus on reducingsingle-parent families’ reliance on state assistance bycollecting child support from non-custodial parents (typicallyfathers). These laws pressure fathers to pay child support throughstricter penalties for non-payment, but do not help fathersovercome barriers (eg, unstable employment) that prevent payment.In addition, PRWORA does not help fathers gain access to theirchildren, which, according to research, promotes payment andchild welfare. A literature review indicates that children whogrow up without a father experience more psychosocial difficultyand diminished well-being compared to children who grow up ina two parent household. Thus, it is recommended that the federalgovernment make greater efforts to assist fathers in their abilityto provide emotional and developmental guidance for their childrenthrough father involvement programmes. Programmes such as mediation,parenting plans, joint custody, and parental education promotethe well-being of the children and encourage non-residentialparents to fulfill their financial commitments to their offspring,reducing the need for state aid.