Tuesday, August 05, 2008
Needs
We just returned from what is supposed to have been a truly relaxing time. My wife's family converged upon this quiet lake in northern Wisconsin to celebrate the unique flavor and attitude of this family. From Florida, California (San Diego, San Jose, and Sonoma), Wisconsin and Minnesota. Three generations of this family together. I guess I am about to get into the middle of the maelstrom now, so I will have to return to these thoughts later.
Saturday, August 02, 2008
Random Moments
We have to prove that we are working on or addressing Child Welfare issues in order to get federal funding for our position. So let me briefly tell you about my day on Tuesday. It was the second day of scheduled trial. We did not meet on Monday for reasons yet unclear to me. The attorneys finagle most of this anyway. But Tuesday morning we are ready to start testimony at 8:30 a.m. But someone isn't there. Lots of hostile people waiting in the large unenclosed space outside the courtroom. The prospective adoptive families are waiting; the mother and the two fathers are waiting with their individual and collective support persons. There is an advocate from the transitional housing program. There are grandmothers who have not been willing to care for the kids. There is a sibling to one of the fathers, who only recently was reunified with her children. There is conflict in the air because this sibling is the ex-girlfriend of the other father. The sister to this father is dating the brother of the kin foster care provider. Enough yet?
The attorneys start to call this near brouhaha The Jerry Springer Show. I am prepped and ready to go when the county attorney starts to hint that the judge is not likely to TPR the children, especially since one of the fathers has not really done anything wrong. Of course, before this judge took the case, the previous judge informed me that I was not in a position to make decisions or recommendations to address this situation. We could not place this man's daughter with him at that time. Now we are looking at making sure that his rights are protected. So hear this mini-series of a story. His case plan was rather simple - address the domestic violence, complete a chemical health evaluation, and complete both psychological and parenting evaluations. What did he do? Just the psychological evaluation. He is the master of procrastination. The blame goes to everyone but him. He did actually assault his wife. They were on the brink of divorce or separation at some point. They never did any marital counseling. She failed to obtain the OFP and moved in with the other dad's sister (who hates her husband). Almost an agreement now...look at TLC of the children to the FP. Not as good for the kids; not as much a guarantee of consistency and stability, but better than letting these three children - ages 4, 3, and 2, return to the care of this severely dysfunctional family.
Deal falls through. Judge says trial to begin immediately following lunch. We all leave and return to more pointless negotiations. Judge takes the attorneys into chambers where who-knows-what happens, but my attorney comes back with an off-the-wall settlement proposal. Allow the judge to make the decision. This man who knows squat about our case, except what he has seen in recent hearings and what the attorneys have told him in secret, expects to make an informed decision about what is in the children's best interests. You decide for yourself.
Mom has 4 treatment episodes in the last 22 months; has been repeatedly homeless; has been reunified with her children 3 times during that period; has not consistently attended therapy (DBT recommended); allowed a Level 3 sex offender to "store property" (meaning live with her) while she was still working with Child Protection; was involved in a drunken domestic with the father of her two older children (he had not been working his case plan either, obviously); became homeless as a result of the domestic; failed to follow the recommendations for treatment, therapy and domestic abuse intervention; lied to treatment center staff; renewed the relationship with the boyfriend/father of children; failed to get safe and suitable housing (until just one day before the trial); and chose Valley Fair over a regularly scheduled supervised visit with her children. There is more but too much more would not really make our case strong enough.
We go back to court mid-September and the judge will take testimony about the TLC options. Meanwhile mom is now leaving for NYC to attend the wedding of her father. Gone for one entire week, missing two visits with her kids. She has been advised to take a UA before leaving and immediately upon her return.
So in the midst of all this I get a Random Moment e-mail requiring me to respond ASAP to what part of Child Welfare I was engaged in at a particular randomly selected moment. My life almost always is about what is in someone else's children's best interest. Hurry September.
The attorneys start to call this near brouhaha The Jerry Springer Show. I am prepped and ready to go when the county attorney starts to hint that the judge is not likely to TPR the children, especially since one of the fathers has not really done anything wrong. Of course, before this judge took the case, the previous judge informed me that I was not in a position to make decisions or recommendations to address this situation. We could not place this man's daughter with him at that time. Now we are looking at making sure that his rights are protected. So hear this mini-series of a story. His case plan was rather simple - address the domestic violence, complete a chemical health evaluation, and complete both psychological and parenting evaluations. What did he do? Just the psychological evaluation. He is the master of procrastination. The blame goes to everyone but him. He did actually assault his wife. They were on the brink of divorce or separation at some point. They never did any marital counseling. She failed to obtain the OFP and moved in with the other dad's sister (who hates her husband). Almost an agreement now...look at TLC of the children to the FP. Not as good for the kids; not as much a guarantee of consistency and stability, but better than letting these three children - ages 4, 3, and 2, return to the care of this severely dysfunctional family.
Deal falls through. Judge says trial to begin immediately following lunch. We all leave and return to more pointless negotiations. Judge takes the attorneys into chambers where who-knows-what happens, but my attorney comes back with an off-the-wall settlement proposal. Allow the judge to make the decision. This man who knows squat about our case, except what he has seen in recent hearings and what the attorneys have told him in secret, expects to make an informed decision about what is in the children's best interests. You decide for yourself.
Mom has 4 treatment episodes in the last 22 months; has been repeatedly homeless; has been reunified with her children 3 times during that period; has not consistently attended therapy (DBT recommended); allowed a Level 3 sex offender to "store property" (meaning live with her) while she was still working with Child Protection; was involved in a drunken domestic with the father of her two older children (he had not been working his case plan either, obviously); became homeless as a result of the domestic; failed to follow the recommendations for treatment, therapy and domestic abuse intervention; lied to treatment center staff; renewed the relationship with the boyfriend/father of children; failed to get safe and suitable housing (until just one day before the trial); and chose Valley Fair over a regularly scheduled supervised visit with her children. There is more but too much more would not really make our case strong enough.
We go back to court mid-September and the judge will take testimony about the TLC options. Meanwhile mom is now leaving for NYC to attend the wedding of her father. Gone for one entire week, missing two visits with her kids. She has been advised to take a UA before leaving and immediately upon her return.
So in the midst of all this I get a Random Moment e-mail requiring me to respond ASAP to what part of Child Welfare I was engaged in at a particular randomly selected moment. My life almost always is about what is in someone else's children's best interest. Hurry September.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)