e-mail
How many chances should biological parents get to parent children they have abused and/or neglected? When do the rights and best interest of the children come first? Do some biological parents deserve additional help when they are working towards reunification with their children?
A 25 year old mother in Cincinnati first investigation with Children’s Services was in 2003 when her oldest child was sent to live with his maternal grandfather.
Less than a year later county prosecutor tried to remove the children due to her second oldest son had to have the tip of his finger surgically removed. In the effort to keep her one year old son from sucking his finger, she wrapped his thumbs in electrical tape so tightly gangrene set in. The removal of the children was denial. “The explanation was that it was not an intentional act of child abuse.”
In 2005, she gave birth to her third son. She called Children’s Services and stated she was unable to care for her children. They were placed into foster care and with relatives for a year while receiving parenting services.
March 29, police went back to her residence after a neighbor called reporting a child calling for help. They found her 5 year old in a locked feces-strewn closet with door jammed shut with a knife.
When do children suffer enough abuse to deserve the right to be protected? The mother above was involved with Children’s Services on four separate occasions. Do we keep sending these abused or neglected children back because they have not been hurt enough?
A number of foster children and their biological families have repeated run ins with Children’s Services. Sadly this is seen time and time again. Sometime this can go on for years until the children are much older leading to some many more additional problems damage of years of abuse, being in and out of the foster care system, deep emotion scars that have a lasting impact, attachment issues, etc.
Unfortunatly our society still does not see that the rights of the child to be safe should come before that of the parent.
If you have the DNA connection, you will be able to do a lot before anyone will consider taking your “right” to keep you child away.
But if they were an adoptive family, you can bet those kids woulda been outta there long before . . . .
I wrote about this very topic the other day on my personal blog:
http://sandrahanksbenoiton.wordpress.com/2007/06/03/breaking-babys-ribs-a-fundamental-right-of-biology/
I think that most of us who adopted older kids have experience with the damage these parents do. The part that really bothers me, the biological parents almost never get charged with a crime or go to jail. Why isn’t it a crime for the parents to abuse their child? John
I am the foster mom of a toddler who has sufferd physical abuse. I am hoping to adopt him soon. I have considered attempting to sue or take the abuser to civil court on the toddler’s behalf once adopted. Is this possible, has anyone ever heard of anyone trying? I feel like I have to be able to tell him that I fought for him and did not just let them walk away.
I don’t even know what’s wrong with this system.
I’ve been in the foster care and adoption field for four years, and is the first time that I hear asking somebody other than myself how many times is enough? Who in their right mind would put themselves in a situation where they may get hurt, abuse, neglect for a second, third, fourth time? Who would put themselves in a situation to be left alone in a car seat, unattended and without food for days, weeks? Who would put themselves in a situation where strangers or the parents themselves violate our body and force you to do unspeakable things? I wish that when the judges read the children’s profile they be willing to put themselves in the situation they condemn the children to live in, when giving a second chance to some parent. The children depend on us, the adults, to help them. Why should we be more sympathetic and giving a chance to an abuser than to giving a chance of a healthy life to a child? It makes no sense that we are setting these children as lame ducks for the sake of “keeping the family together.” Let’s change the laws to something more draconian because these parents are no cutting it, and meth is here to stay.