I previously wrote about the start to the adoptions process in this post. I was able to attend the third day of "training" on the first Saturday of May. (The first two days were already completed when I did my foster care training - this is a day specifically for adoptions, although most of what we went over I already knew from doing foster care.) One of the discussions during the day was about the fact that when you adopt from foster care, you have to sign an agreement saying you will never use corporal punishment (including spanking) as a form of discipline for that child you adopt. Although I signed a contract not to use corporal punishment for foster children, and although I don't think I would really use it much anyway as I feel there are many more effective forms of discipline, I was a little surprised to find out that this is dictated for a family even after an adoption has taken place. The reason is that many of these children have endured physical trauma and/or abuse from their families in their lives, and corporal punishment is likely to trigger major issues for these kids. But... it just seems that it might be something that no one could truly enforce once an adoption has happened.
But I digress...
Then in June, Elmer's GAL (guardian ad litem) called saying that she needed to see him before court on the 17th; she gave me only a few days notice, so I had no choice but to have her go see him at daycare. However, in seven months, she had not ONCE come to the house or seen me interact with Elmer. I really wanted her to do that so that she could provide first-hand information about where Elmer should end up when it went to the adoptions committee to decide the adoptive family. So we scheduled a visit for the following week.
I was off all day on Wednesday, so I ended up scheduling a bunch of different things. Elmer's adoptions worker (the one who no-showed or cancelled three times) was supposed to come at 9am, the GAL was supposed to come between 9 and 9:30, and the person completing my adoptions home study was supposed to come at 11am. At 8:55am, the adoptions worker called and said she thought the appointment was at 9:30 and she would need to reschedule; I told her if she could be here by 9:30, to just come on. I had planned all of these things for a day that I was off, and trying to find a different day that would work would be even harder than adjusting my schedule that day.
She arrived at 9:30 and was gone by 9:45. At this point, the GAL still hadn't arrived yet. I called her to see if she was still planning on coming (as we hadn't set up an exact time), and she said she forgot about it because she had been out sick, but could be here in 20 minutes. So we waited. She as well was not here very long. As soon as she left, I took Elmer to daycare so that I could get back for the adoptions home study. She was the only of the three appointments that actually showed up on time.
The adoptions home study was pretty much exactly the same as the foster care home study, except this lady asked a lot more questions that were not in the autobiography packet. (I don't know if that was a difference between foster and adoption home studies, or just a difference in the two interviewers.) I also had to ask the foster care home study examiner if she was going to look at the child's room; this adoption examiner asked to see practically every square inch of the house! The laundry room, the backyard, the bathrooms, the linen closet, on and on.
She also had to come back a second time as a formality (they said at the foster care home study that they usually come twice, but because I was single, they were able to complete everything they needed to in one visit). She emailed me July 5th to let me know that she had submitted my home study to DSS that day. From what I hear, it usually takes about a month for the state to give an answer about the license.
As a reminder, this adoptions process is on a completely independent and separate timeline from the timeline of Elmer's case. I actually had her complete the home study as a general one (not specifically for Elmer) so that it would still be valid if things do not end in adoption with Elmer. (Separate post about Elmer's case coming.)
No comments:
Post a Comment