Permanency Planning Trial

Court for permanency planning for Elmer's case was scheduled for August 22.  It was "Standby Case B", meaning it would get heard if there was still time after the main case and Standby Case A. 


For "hearings," each case is on the docket for 15 minutes only, so any contested matters - i.e. if DSS and the family cannot agree - are "continued" for trial. For trials, they will take as much time as needed to present the evidence and for the judge to make a decision.  Hence, sometimes the standby cases get heard on trial day, and sometimes they don't.


Court was planned for a workday for me (the hearings are usually on Fridays, a day that I don't typically work). I had just been out of work sick for ten days a couple of weeks before, so I decided not to take more time off of work for a case that might or might not get heard. 


In the end, the case WAS heard and the caseworker texted me that they got the agreement that the plan would be TPR concurrent with reunification so that the parents would agree.  She said that DSS was still planning on going through with the TPR. 


I wish that I had been there so that I could have seen how things progressed to end up at that point.  I thought that because this was a TRIAL, that it was up to the judge to make a decision and that they didn't need to have the parents agree.  So I don't know if the judge just felt sorry for the parents and so said reunification would be a concurrent goal; or if it was just easier to proceed if the parents agreed; or if this is TRULY a concurrent goal. 


I have had a couple of people ask how those two things could be concurrent goals since they are polar opposites.  It actually is common to have those two goals together.  Meaning, the goal is reunification (as it almost always is in foster care), but knowing that there are often times when the parents can't get it together and so there is a backup goal of TPR/adoption - and all the preparation for the adoption side of things is done if the reunification does not work out.  I understand the concurrent goal as a general concept.  However, in this particular case, I have a hard time wrapping my head around reunification still being any sort of goal, since the parents don't have a treatment plan and agreed to "forego all reasonable efforts to reunite."  So then why is reunification still written down on paper?

Case Update

Court was June 17th. 


This was both a merits hearing for dad (because he had not shown up the first two times, but court was continued due to the fact that he had a lawyer there), and a permanency planning hearing (to determine what the long-term case plan is). 


As far as the merits hearing, dad was present (maybe not of his own will) and did not contest that DSS was not offering him a treatment plan.  However, they did stipulate that dad could complete treatment on his own. 


As far as permanency planning, DSS recommended the permanency goal be changed to TPR and adoption.  Both parents contested that.  Because it was contested, now there has to be a permanency planning TRIAL for both sides to present testimony and the judge to decide what the permanency plan should be.  (As of right now, I have not heard a trial date.) 


* I did not know that there was a separate permanency planning HEARING and TRIAL.  I do remember a note on one of the previous court notices for another child, saying, "This is scheduled for 15 minutes.  Any contested matters will be continued for trial."  I will say that every time I go to court, I seem to learn something new.  At some point when I feel like I know enough to do so, I want to write a post summarizing the legal process and all of the things that can happen. *


And in the midst of the discussion about permanency planning, the bomb was dropped.  Elmer's mom has named two more relatives that need to be investigated to see if they are feasible placements.  Ugh.  Where were these relatives nine months ago?!  My guess is that they were not willing to take him when there was potential for him to have issues, and now that he is "fine", they are okay with it.  (Or I hope - selfishly - that maybe they are still not okay with it, and mom is just trying to buy time.) 


And it's now a month later, and I haven't heard any more information one way or the other about these other two relatives - if home studies have been completed, what the results were if they have, or if they have declined home studies (as at least one of the other relatives in the past did).

Is One Out of Three Acceptable?

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.) 

Meet Elmer

For anyone new to the blog, this is 7-month old Elmer. 

7-month old with a high-risk history who has just started getting up on his hands and knees, and who has just learned to purposefully put his bib up over his face and pull it back down to play peek-a-boo. 

7-month old who is now one of the most "chill" babies I have ever seen, but once was a 6-week old who was never fully settled. 

7-month old who smiles all. the. time. but whose adorable smile I can't show you.  :(

Elmer is the fifth foster child that has been placed with me.  He is the first one that has had a primary plan of adoption.  The next step is another merits hearing that will be scheduled for dad in June sometime (he has not showed up for the first two).  The caseworker thinks they will be asking for recommendation of TPR (termination of parental rights) as well during that court date.  This case is going on way too long for one where the parents aren't even being given a treatment plan.

The Adoption Process

I got a call in late January from someone from our Region's Adoption Services, saying that she needed to meet with  me and Elmer. 


We set up a meeting for the first Friday in February (Fridays are my day off and when I try to plan all the foster care meetings and doctor's appointments, etc.).  She didn't show up.  I called her 30 minutes after she was supposed to be here.  She made an excuse, but really, I was gathering that she just forgot to put it on her calendar. 


So we rescheduled for the next Friday at the same time that Elmer's caseworker would be doing her monthly visit.  The day before that meeting, the adoptions worker called and said she thought she was working her part-time job the following Friday but it was actually the Friday we had set up our meeting... so she needed to reschedule.


I couldn't do the following Friday (because it was Twin's adoption day) so we set up an evening that week.  Two hours before we were supposed to meet, I got a voice mail from the adoptions worker saying that she had another appointment at the same time that she had failed to put on her calendar so she would have to reschedule. 


At this point, I was hot.  We had three different appointments already set up, and three times she had to reschedule (or no-showed), not due to unforeseen circumstances or emergencies coming up, but rather due to her NOT WRITING THINGS DOWN ON HER CALENDAR and not being able to manage her schedule.  I was already anxious to get the ball rolling because I didn't want there to be any hold-up if the judge recommended termination of parental rights (TPR) at the next court date, which I figured would be in April or so.  (Since then, I have learned we are nowhere near close to that point yet.)  So I called and left a not-so-nice voice mail saying I wanted to make sure she had checked and re-checked and re-checked again her schedule to make sure that we actually had the meeting this time, as I had already arranged my schedule three different times for this meeting.  When she returned my call, she had the nerve to say, "Well, I am trying to get this done on YOUR schedule.  Evenings are more difficult." [We had only scheduled one evening - the others were Friday afternoons.]


We FINALLY were able to meet up the following week.  Basically all that was done was that she asked if I was interested in adoption, I said yes and signed a form stating that and that said all the pre-requisites had to be completed in 90 days, and the adoption worker asked if I had contacted Adoptions Services yet to get the process started.  I said, um, no, I thought that's what you were here for.  Apparently not.  She gave me the name and number of the person to contact and I rode her phone for several days until I got in contact with her.  During our meet-up, the adoptions worker also said that once rights were terminated, they would put me with 2-3 other families to a committee who would decide who the child would be adopted by.  That the foster family usually is the one chosen, but that there are no guarantees.  I knew that this would be said (several other foster families had told me this), but even so, it still makes your gut drop. 


Once I talked with the Adoptions Services office, they set me up to go to Adoptions Orientation shortly after.  I went to that meeting, which basically was a lot of things I already knew, or discussing requirements I already had done through the foster care licensing process. 


At this point, I have filled out the few pieces of paperwork that were not included in my foster care licensing, and have emailed Adoptions Services to determine if they need the rest of the requirements or if they can get them from my foster care licensing file. 


This whole adoptions process is completely separate from Elmer's actual case.  Even if all the adoptions requirements are completed does not mean that adoption would happen any time soon after.  The parental rights would have to be terminated first, which may be on a completely different time frame than the adoptions process. 


I've been fostering for almost two years now, and there are still things that I have no clue about!

Relatives and Court

I had gotten a text a few weeks ago saying that Elmer's parents had named a relative that may take him. 


On Friday, January 8, I received a phone call from the guardian ad litem (GAL) asking how Elmer was doing.  I'm sure it was no coincidence that court was the following Monday. 




Side note: From what I have read on others' blogs, I believe in some states the GAL is a lawyer.  In this state, the GAL is a volunteer from the community who is supposed to talk to everyone and determine what is in the best interest of the child. 


She told me that the relative that was possibly going to take Elmer had backed out, and so she wasn't sure that court would even be held. 


I showed up anyway on Monday, January 11, and his mom was there.  In the list of things in the agreement, I noticed that it did not include the standard "will maintain stable housing, submit to random drug screens, attend parenting classes, etc".  I found out on Friday, January 15 when JATH visited our home that was because Elmer's parents were not going to have a treatment plan.  I was a little blown away by that, as it seems parents often get way too many chances, but I am not sure if the parents declined a treatment plan or if DSS would not offer one. 


In court, I also learned that a homestudy would be done on one of Elmer's relatives.  At first, I thought this was the same relative who was going to take him from the NICU and then changed their mind.  At JATH's visit, I learned that this is now a different relative.  Even so, all I can think is, "Where has this person been for the last almost three and a half months?!"  And I'm still not clear on if this is a different relative from the one the GAL thought had backed out, or if the GAL was just mistaken in thinking they had backed out. 


JATH told me on Friday that they are still trying to get in touch with the relative to set up the homestudy.  They did not call it an "expedited" homestudy, so I think DSS has 60 days to complete it?  So now we just wait and see what happens.

Merits Hearing

(I said in this post that the Probable Cause hearing was when the treatment plan for the parent was determined.  I was wrong; sometimes they both happen at the same time, but usually there is a separate Merits Hearing to establish a legal treatment plan.)

I attended the Merits Hearing this morning.  I learned that it is best to attend court hearings if possible because you can learn so much about the case.  This proved to be a challenge this morning as daycare was closed today due to torrential rains and flood potential; a previous co-worker that lives close to court was able to keep Tigger for me while I was at court. 

What I learned is that it is not likely Tigger will be with me much longer.  His neighbor has requested to be considered for official placement so they are completing an expedited home study (meaning it has to be done in the next thirty days).  (At first, I wondered why she would call DSS about this child and then request to get him back; but I guess at this point he would still be in foster care and mom would have to follow DSS guidelines and supervision.)  They are also completing a home study on Tigger's maternal aunt who lives in another state.  It sounds like mom has requested that he be placed with the neighbor so that she can still see him.  Dad is out of the picture and not capable of caring for Tigger.  From everything the investigator said about the situation with the neighbor when Tigger was removed, I don't have any reason to believe she won't pass her home study. 

I will be so sad to see him go, but glad that I went to court and learned that his leaving is a definite possibility in the near future so that I can prepare myself emotionally for that possibility. 

Tigger

On Tuesday around noon, I got a call for a five-month old boy but they didn't have him in care yet.  I said I had patients scheduled until five, but to call me when they had a better idea of time frame.  Well, 5:00 rolled around without a call, and when I called to ask what the status was, the placement worker said, "What?  No one called you?  They've been walking that baby around the office all afternoon."  So I left work pretty much after that and little Tigger arrived around 6:00.  (He got his blog name because he is VERY active for his age, and he has a touch of orange-ish hair on top of his head.)  Because he was in the office all afternoon, they had already submitted for the $100 clothing voucher we get when a child comes into care and had put in an order to an organization that provides clothes for children in need (which arrived the next day). 

Tigger fell asleep by 7:00 that first night, but then was up again from 7:45-10:00, and then was up again at 1:00 and 5:00, but thank goodness went back to sleep again until 9 the next morning which gave me a chance to get a shower before he woke up.  Since then, he has settled into a little bit more of a routine, but we are still working on it.  I had a chance to talk with his neighbor that had been caring for him off and on for the last several months, so I did get some idea of his schedule and eating habits (at least when he was with her - she said his schedule would always get off when he went with his mom).  She seemed like a super nice lady, and I think the reason she is not the one still caring for him is because she finally decided he had had enough chaos and turmoil in his life and that she no longer wanted to be in the middle of it. 

The neighbor told me the night Wednesday night when I was talking to her that Tigger's mom wouldn't show up to the probable cause hearing at court the next day; she was right.  (When a child is removed by EPC - emergency protective custody - they have to have court within a few days for the judge to determine if there actually WAS cause to remove the child).  Usually, this is also when/where the treatment plan for the parent is determined (what they need to do to get the child back).  So court was "continued" (delayed) until Monday.  

If mom gets Tigger back, it will be a minimum of six months to complete her treatment plan based on what the investigator said.  So far, there has been no mention of his dad or other relatives that may be interested in caring for him. 

Tigger is such a cute and happy little fellow!  Life's about to get busy again!