You have to read between the lines; Brennan is being economical with the truth. The targets were meant to get children already in care out of care into adoption - the aim was for a 50% increase on 1999/2000 figures by 2006 - hence his claim that the policy ended in 2006. Councils realised they could meet the targets by taking children from their parents instead. This is the law of unintended consequences and led to a rise in children under 1 placed for adoption of 123%, while numbers of older children placed fell. Brennan's denial contradicts the announcement made by the Government on Jan 20th that targets will be scrapped in April.
I agree that the agencies are really quick to put put our children up for adoption at the resistance of parents. Most cases with time these young parents will out grow their problems. But in the eyes the agency this would take too long and cost them money. There goal is to get the children adopted to save the province money and the headache. They do not take into consideration how many families they have ripped apart. There is no reason why a permanent guardianship cannot be used instead without adoption precedings. Most other family members are taking care of siblings anyway and do not get paid from the government for doing so. This who fiasco has got to do with time. They also under estimate how resiliant children are. Later in years as the children are older they want to be with their mothers or fathers if they have been rehabilated. Not all cases have got to do with abuse. This is not the only reason they take children away. Some of the stories you hear regarding dealing with social assistance workers are really distressing. They only see what they want. Their rules are the only ones. They are arrogant and deceptive. Fairness in this system is not an option. They have lawyers at their finger tips and can place an order in a matter of days. Majority of us has never been to a lawyer have to find one have to pay for one or not. This could take weeks. So people who have had their children up for adoption and fought have little chance. If you read the their criteria. Their goal is supposed to try everything in their power (first) to keep the family together. NOT I please with any worker who has their small child taken from them to feel the sickness you get at the pit of your stomach. This is a life sentence, and the mothers & childs life will never be the same ever again. All most people need is a little more time to gt their life together. Signed Terrible world we live in.
You have to read between the lines; Brennan is being economical with the truth. The targets were meant to get children already in care out of care into adoption - the aim was for a 50% increase on 1999/2000 figures by 2006 - hence his claim that the policy ended in 2006. Councils realised they could meet the targets by taking children from their parents instead. This is the law of unintended consequences and led to a rise in children under 1 placed for adoption of 123%, while numbers of older children placed fell. Brennan's denial contradicts the announcement made by the Government on Jan 20th that targets will be scrapped in April.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the agencies are really quick to put put our children up for adoption at the resistance of parents. Most cases with time these young parents will out grow their problems. But in the eyes the agency this would take too long and cost them money. There goal is to get the children adopted to save the province money and the headache. They do not take into consideration how many families they have ripped apart. There is no reason why a permanent guardianship cannot be used instead without adoption precedings. Most other family members are taking care of siblings anyway and do not get paid from the government for doing so.
ReplyDeleteThis who fiasco has got to do with time. They also under estimate how resiliant children are.
Later in years as the children are older they want to be with their mothers or fathers if they have been rehabilated.
Not all cases have got to do with abuse. This is not the only reason they take children away.
Some of the stories you hear regarding dealing with social assistance workers are really distressing.
They only see what they want. Their rules are the only ones. They are arrogant and deceptive.
Fairness in this system is not an option. They have lawyers at their finger tips and can place an order
in a matter of days.
Majority of us has never been to a lawyer have to find one have to pay for one or not. This could take weeks.
So people who have had their children up for adoption and fought have little chance.
If you read the their criteria. Their goal is supposed to try everything in their power (first) to keep the family together. NOT
I please with any worker who has their small child taken from them to feel the sickness you get at the pit of your stomach. This is a life sentence, and the mothers & childs life will never be the same ever again.
All most people need is a little more time to gt their life together.
Signed
Terrible world we live in.