Arrghhhh! Can't do this anymore

[marybobbins]

I am so very angry, how can the LA come up with and stick so vehemently to a plan for a child when all of those actually involved with the child, professionals as well as us mere foster carers are saying this isn't what is in the best interest of the child?
Everything is being fought in court but I just can't believe that they have any justification for what they are planning to do other than a financial benefit for themselves.
I am just so angry on the child's behalf, we just can't do this anymore. Just want to scream and let the world know.

[scarlet5tyger]

marybobbins it's so frustrating isn't it. I'm in the middle of a disastrous situation where a child was moved to an unsuitable placement 3 years ago - which myself and his SW felt was for financial reasons. That's now broken down and he's coming back into care. He can't come back to me as I don't have a place free, so will have to move to yet another home. He's also 3 years older (than when he moved) so might be considered too old for adoption.

I assume you've already done all the usual things like speaking to the guardian? Sadly I've found that once the people "in charge" make up their minds they tend to stick to it.

Feel free to scream away here!

[marybobbins]

Thank you for your reply scarlet.
Yes we have spoken to the guardian and to be fair he is on our side as is the child's social worker the HV, GP and our own link worker but the la still want to push ahead with their own plan despite everyone who has actually met and spent time with the child being against it! I am just flummoxed by their arrogance.

Have been taking my anger out on the weeds so at least the garden is looking good but we have another 3 months to wait before everyone is fighting it out in court for a final decision.

The children's needs seem to be getting pushed aside more and more often and we have now been left in a dangerous situation, even the la have admitted we are now going to have to be very careful and take extra measures to protect ourselves but they are the ones putting us in dangerous situations.

I am going to bake some bread just so I can throw the dough about!
AGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

[Mum2lots]

Independent advocacy service like NYAS 0800616101

[Roshbegosh]

I admit I can't fully work out what's going on from your post OP as you can't identify yourself but how can they go against everyone to save some money? It is criminal. So sorry to hear you are having to cope with this absurd situation but please don't stop fostering because of it, you are in there doing the hard yards and doing good.

[NanaNina]

Are you an IFA carer mary - if so I assume the LA are wanting to move the child to one of their own carers. IF this is the case it is because the LA can't really afford IFA carers because they cost so much and they are having their budgets slashed to the bare minimum. Sorry if I'm on the wrong track. If I am on the right track, then NO it is not fair to the child, but nothing is fair with public services since this awful coalition came into power.

I have heard from a very reliable source that some inner city LAs are saying that they can no longer ask the Court's permission for removing a child from a home where there is abuse and neglect, because they can't afford to pay foster carers and all the court fees etc etc.

It's dire and it can only get worse..............

[marybobbins]

Hi NanaNina,

We foster for the LA not an IFA.
We actually have two foster children and the LA want to split them up despite the children's own sw and guardian being against it. They consider one child to be adoptable and the other not. They are very attached to each other and I just don't know how they would cope being separated.

[marybobbins]

The children's family have also been very violent towards past foster carers and sw's but the LA failed to pass on certain information that we should have had before the children were placed. The LA are now saying that in hindsight they should have been moved out of the city.

[marybobbins]

Sorry, should have said the children are full siblings.

[NanaNina]

Sorry Mary the only reason I thought you were IFA carers is because you said the guardian, the child's sw, HV, GP and your link worker were opposed to the plan. SO I'm left wondering who is in favour of the plan? It is the child's sw who is responsible for the care plan and if she/he is against separating the children and the guardian is, I can't understand who wants to split the children up????

[marybobbins]

The LA still want to go ahead with the plan of adoption despite the objections of the guardian and there own social worker filling in his report that he thinks adoption is unsuitable, its his manager who has never met the children who is pushing for adoption.
They have said that the only reason they are pushing for adoption is because the younger child is under 5 and because of that she should automatically go up for adoption.
The social worker is actually going to be our best witness in court. I just find it impossible to understand why they are pushing for this when every report they have asked to be done (and which have been carried out by there own employees) has come back saying adoption is not suitable.
I am just hoping the judge will make the right decision for the children.

[Mum2lots]

This I am afraid seems to be very common xxx heartbreaking isn't it xxx I know this from experience

[NanaNina]

Well let's hope the LA lawyer pulls rank, because the social worker can't go to court for the final hearing disagreeing with the team manager. If the tm mgr feels so strongly he will have to give evidence and be cross examined by the lawyer for the children, appointed by the guardian, and possibly the defence lawyer for the birthparents. Think he might just change his tune if this is the case. It's ludicrous to think of parting sibs just because one is under 5. What age is the other one by the way?

Sometimes with large sibling groups, they just have to be split as it wouldn't be fair to them to expect one family to meet all their needs on a permanent basis, but I'm guessing there are just 2 here?

[marybobbins]

The guardian has been great and the LA lawyer is going to cross examine the children's social worker in court as to why in his report he has stated he doesn't believe adoption will work but yet adoption is still being put in the care plan. The sw has been great as well and has admitted to the guardian and lawyer that the only reason adoption is being pushed is because of age.
The crazy thing is the older child is less that two years older but he has additional health problems and is deemed unsuitable for adoption by the LA.

[NanaNina]

I am amazed that the LA lawyer is taking this course of action to be honest, because this issue should be sorted before the final hearing, as the child's sw and tm mgr have to be "barking up the same tree." It is not acceptable for the LA to "air their differences" at the final hearing and I think the Judge will have a great deal to say about it. I think the LA lawyer must be very inexperienced.