"State misses foster-care goals"
An independent panel of national experts found the state failed to meet two-thirds of its goals in a landmark effort to improve foster care, according to a report released Tuesday.Posted by Stefan Sharkansky at March 29, 2006 09:03 AM | Email This
Luckily for the kids they finally managed to adopt, the kids will now grow up in good families. But the one's who have to stay under the wing of the government are doomed.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 29, 2006 09:39 AMRight now DSHS is cutting services to the kids and the biological parents. The bio-parent part is important, in order for the State to take kids it needs to be proven in court that the parents are incapable of caring for the kids. Part of the proof is giving the parents the opportunity to straighten up and fly right.
When the State cuts these service the case stalls for lack of proof. That hangs the kids in limbo.
The current system is for bureaucrats by bureaucrats, and run on the backs of children. It is anything but "for the children."
I will say the front line case workers we have worked with have be absolutely marvelous. The problems lie at mid-level management and above, populated by those with lots of education and theory and no experience. Once at upper management it becomes all political, turf, position and power.
Remember state budget increased by 16%, DSHS budget is going up, yet services to the kids and parents are being cut.
The current crop in Olympia is a bunch of pandering partisan political jacka** who only care about securing another term in office.
The proof is in the pudding.
Next Her Highness stands up and says "for the children," our response should be B*LLSH*T
I wrote to the Governor, her offices' response.
Governor Gregoire thanks you for your message about the lack of funds for social services programs to help children, and most especially one of the two foster children in your care who suffered such serious injury when he was only months old.
The Legislature appropriates money to the Department of Social and Health Services (DSHS) in specific line items in the budget - so much for children's services; so much for mental health; so much for medical care, etc. The Legislature does not give DSHS the authority to shift funding appropriated for one category (e.g. medical care) to another - (e.g. to children's), for example. Because we are not in a position to review the specifics in this case, we have forwarded your message to DSHS and asked that the agency please do so and respond to you directly about whether additional services might be available.
Please know that Governor Gregoire is aware that funding the Legislature has set aside for children's services is really tight. In her 2006 budget proposal, she requested additional funding for child welfare services. She is pleased that the Legislature increased funding in many areas, as she requested. These areas include, among others, placement evaluations and supervised visitation; foster parent supportive services; and for both foster care and adoption support. Like you, the Governor cares deeply about children and wants to see that they have the care they need.
With regard to recent media reports about cosmetic surgeries authorized by DSHS, Governor Gregoire is committed to appropriately using taxpayer dollars. We want to clarify that the Medicaid program does not cover cosmetic surgery. It pays for medically necessary surgery to restore functionality for low-income individuals who have suffered trauma or disfigurement. It is worth noting that the report referenced in the media was from 2004, but we assure you that the Governor will review this item in the 2005 report, when that is released, to verify that expenditures have been appropriate.
Again, thank you for your message. The Governor thanks you for your critical role as a foster parent and for your commitment to providing these children with the care they so desperately need at this time.
Sincerely,
Constituent Services
Office of the Governor
In other words, so sorry, it's the Legislatures fault.
Increased funding? It's getting lost somewhere between Olympia and the kids.
Good job. Our family is in the system, too. We just adopted our foster kids of three years about a year ago.
Some of these kids in the system come from families with a zillion kids. How do you get them in one home? We took two of three and it is a struggle raising them. There is a reason they are in foster care. We are just hoping our discipline eventually rubs off on them, because it doesn't seem to now. We at least have them talking about careers outside 7-11 clerks or waitresses; if they have a career there, at least they will have dreamed of something else.
With e-mails and things, why do the social workers have to see every kid every 30 days?
Posted by: swatter on March 29, 2006 10:35 AMI am a greedy ultra right wing gun owning SUV driving evangelical christian conservative.
I'm in it for the money.
Stop or you'll spoil my shtick.
We've two little guys, full brothers, we hope to adopt them.
The major key to this stopping it from even starting. That will take overturning the cultural of permissiveness, re-establishing personal responsibility, and not rewarding via welfare destructive behaviors. But that all is a huge subject.
I'd settle for seeing some of the money get to the ground level in DSHS.
Posted by: JCM on March 29, 2006 11:24 AMI hope some of the trolls choked on that.
Posted by: swatter on March 29, 2006 11:35 AMThis story was as predictable as rain.
Posted by: stu on March 29, 2006 04:38 PMI don't blame you for being old, bitter, and cynical. I'll see you in the woods.
The legislature caters to every special interest group (reference the African American unit disaster) and we end up with funding for this that, everything, and nothing.
What kills me is the bureaucracy, a black hole were ideas and money are lost for ever.
The victims are the ones left holding the short, dirty end of the stick.
Posted by: JCM on March 29, 2006 05:38 PM