MIL reaction to our proposal to begin fostering children. AIBU to find this upsetting?

[Happypomegranate]

We FaceTimed our in-laws on Xmas day and mentioned our intention to apply to become foster carers. This is something we have both wanted to do for years, but have been previously unable due to work commitments and living in a small flat. We’ve been very fortunate and we now live in a big house and we are financially secure enough that I don’t have to work. I still do a little bit of part time care work but can give this up to focus on fostering. MIL initially said she thought our DD was too young which is a fair point to make. We have a toddler and will not be having anymore biological children. I said we would discuss with the LA but we could wait until DD was in school if necessary but that we just wanted to get the ball rolling as we know how long these things can take. But it later became apparent that she was very against the idea of us fostering at any point in the future and I don’t believe my DD’s age has anything to do with it. She used language such as ‘it will be someone you don’t know’, ‘there could be problems’, and ‘troubled children’. We have done our research and we are aware that the children may have additional needs, mental health and/or behavioural problems, but every child in need of a foster placement is different and I feel it’s not right to stereotype. As for children that may come with challenges, I feel it would be our job as the foster parents to try and work through the challenges with the children. I don’t understand why she doesn’t want us to support vulnerable children, it’s just bizarre to me. It hurts because I had an extremely abusive childhood, struggled with mental health in my early adulthood and I’ve worked really hard to get to a place where I am happy, stable and resilient. I feel I could have a lot to give as a foster carer. My DH is lovely and a great dad, and I believe he’d be a fantastic foster carer but he had a drastically different upbringing from me. Think well to-do, independent school, etc. We are an unlikely but very happy pair. I thought she would be supportive but she’s actively against it and I’m not sure why it bothers me so much because it’s ultimately my and my husbands decision to apply, not hers. AIBU to be upset?

What kind of safeguarding do you have in mind?

Like maybe thinking carefully about the safety impact of foster children with various levels on trauma have on young children.
And the emotional impact of that.

You know, actually thinking it through on a practical level rather than 'trusting god will take care of it'.

Look around you. You can't rely on your faith to keep your children safe. That's your actual responsibility.

From this thread it seems like some people don’t think anyone should foster.

You would be putting your own child in a very vulnerable position if you have children who a victims of CSA.
You mean well but your own child is far too young.

I think it's a responsible job and so should be treated as seriously as other responsible jobs.

Religious batshittery has no place in a foster home. You can force that shit on your own kids.

Exposing toddlers to traumatized teens and children is not responsible parenting.

It's a low bar just to expect sanity and responsibility to be qualities in someone looking to do it.

Thanks. Of course we did our due diligence in those ways too. Lots of training on attachment disorders, safe care plans and house rules to protect both fc and dc. And an age range for fc that fitted with our own dc, so that we started with newborn babies while our youngest was little, not much imminent danger to our own children from babies in arms. We also said no the placements that didn't fit with the safety of our own kids. We had an excellent supporting social worker who looked out for us. So all the good practice in place for fostering families, backed up by some wishy thinking to make us feel better about it, perhaps.

Do you foster? If so, with what motivation? If not, what would you count as an acceptable motivation?

I think you’ve misunderstood what you’ve read. People don’t think a parent to a single toddler should foster, as they lack parenting experience. particularly one where there has been very recent trauma therapy required.

and quite frankly neither do the local authorities, which is why most will rule the op out. This doesn’t mean no one should foster.

No, I don't foster but I have a responsible job working with children. My fathers parents fostered and it wasn't a good for him or his siblings.

I'd say a good motivation would be to provide a safe and appropriate environment for children. But having young children in the house is not this situation. It's quite simple really.

Fair points. So you are saying families with young children of their own should never foster? Until their own children are what age? And that motivation should be entirely secular?

I don't think you can take the risk down to adequately protect children to am acceptable risk with children in the house, no.

On the religious motivation - I think people should be open and honest about their motivations and explore why the system might consider this a red flag.

There is nothing wrong with religious people Forster I g of course - as long as they don’t try to influence the children in their care or impose their own belief system on them. Your recognised your views on homosexuality for example would be problematic. I hope you were open about this during the assessment stages.

Fair enough, less risk if there's no other children in the home, though the risk from babies is limited, surely? But how do you cater for the need, when more and more children come into care? I'm estimating that about a quarter of fostering households have their own children at home, and there still aren't enough places available. And I just read that Christians are three times more likely to foster than the population in general, so how do we make do without the wishy thinkers?

Fostering can be brillliant we enjoyed doing it for years because our own children had grown up, so they weren't at risk of harm from the children we looked after. Wouldn't have ever exposed my children to the behaviours we've seen over the years when they were young. The thing is that social workers often have no idea what has happened to the children they place with you. There's often a honeymoon period of a few weeks and then it all comes out. You need a strong stomach to deal with a lot of it

I'd hope that christians are able.to make rational decisions without relying on spiritual intervention. It's a bit worrying that you think christians can't seem to uncouple that.

Yes there's a lack of places. That doesn't mean safeguarding standards should be lowered. Perhaps more support and motivation for single couples who are actually suitable. Perhaps early intervention, funding and support for families before children have to be taken away. Family planning support. Many services need to be considered before we can assume that we have the best system to avoid and support sad situations.

Thanks. I suppose foster carers shouldn't impose a secular world view on the children either? It's hard not to have an influence on children that you help to raise. Social services were happy enough with our faith to let us take the children to church on Sundays, say grace at meals etc. They always checked that this was OK with the birth parents too.

As a pp said, Christians tend to see all decisions through a spiritual lens. With the figures I just quoted in mind, it's clear that their faith is a major factor in Christians choosing to foster (they're also twice as likely to adopt). Where we live, Social services work closely with some of the churches to recruit a lot of foster carers. There are also a few Christian fostering agencies.

I'd be wary of people making safeguarding decisions through the lens of 'spirituality'.

My grandparents incidentally once took in a homeless man because of their Christian beliefs, despite being advised against it because of the risk.

He was a drug adult and subsequently robbed them.
They'd have been better off making decisions based on reality.

I am not sure what you mean by a secular world view? Are you conflating secular and atheist? I am atheist and would never tell a child there is no god. I would tell them that some believe in God, some people believe the Bible is true and and that should be respected and protected. But everyone must form their own view.

Explaining what you believe in a of course fine - but children should have freedom of and from religion.

This story for example shows the challenges that can come up:

amp.theguardian.com/society/2011/feb/28/christian-couple-lose-care-case

"I simply don't agree that it was dishonest. Your hectoring tone suggested that you were against foster parents having a spiritual dimension to their decision (which they always will as everything has a spiritual element for them). But anyway, I'm willing to bet there are children who knew a loving home and stable, trusted adults because of that poster's actions and I'm glad you weren't able to rain on that parade, other than belatedly sniping on the internet."

Hectoring tone? Fuck me 🤣. Have you even read his AMA where he clearly says the people assessing didn't like the motivation he had being a religious calling so he omitted that part on the next application despite it being the truth!? If that's not dishonest to you then fine but I'm not "sniping on the internet" and my discussion with @Petros9 was simply pointing out that he couldn't possibly know how his biological children have been affected since one is only 14 years old.

Not sure why you've taken such issue with that @Reindeersnooker since Petros himself took the point on board and agreed with it.

I stand by my argument that the OP is not suitable to foster since she has a toddler and personal trauma to deal with. I also think you should be completely open when applying and hiding the degree of impact a calling from God has had on your decision making is dishonest.

I can see you're not a big fan of basing decisions on faith, perhaps not a fan of Christianity or religion in general. You also alluded to the church's safeguarding record, I assume in connection with scandals in church institutions etc. But Christians (and people of other faiths) also do a lot of good work in areas like fostering, making a big impact on those who need help. A lot of them wouldn't do that work without their faith.

A lot of them wouldn't do that work without their faith.

Well they're not very nice people then are they?

I just don't believe in sacred castes. Jimmy Saville did a lot of good work for.children didn't he? Motivated by his faith. If only safeguarding had been applied to that case a lot of trauma could have been avoided.

I couldn’t agree more.

From this thread all I’ve taken is those who have no idea of what foster care entails cannot see the the different challenges each placement poses. I loved working with children and their families and know I made a difference. Each child came with their own problems and each child left me with the best outcome, according to their individual needs. Except two. They stayed (that’s another story, or two).

My only grievance, during my time as a FC, is the, sometimes, unrealistic expectations, and downright condemnation from SS - towards the Foster carers and their birth children, the foster child and their birth families.

I’ve worked with amazing Social Workers, who go above and beyond for the children they are responsible for. I’ve also experienced SW’s who don’t have the brains they were born with and their poor practice has had devastating effects on the children within their case load. There are SW’s who see children as a case - rather than a vulnerable human being who need support. The system pains me.

I can’t keep up with the FC who is religious. I’ve no idea what is happening there tbh. There are many FC’s who are religious. I can’t see that FC applications would be rejected because of “religion”. That makes no sense. Unless the religion was - and I’m only making a suggestion here - Their religion would cause LA to be reluctant to use them because they couldn’t place a child with someone who couldn’t provide the experiences the child’s birth parents would wish for them. Eg Christmas/birthday celebrations. That would cause all sorts of problems. If parents are not happy with the child’s placement, based on their cultural/religious beliefs then it means another move for the child.

Just a scenario guys!

I’ve worked, closely, with FC’s who are Christian (I’ve had a child placed and another FC had the sibling placed with them, so lots of contact) and LA were happy for them to include the foster child in their church services, festivals and celebrations.

Anyway, apart from saying, one more time, that OP is free to pursue her application as a FC. The outcome depends on the info contained within her very lengthy assessment. I’m out now.

You're right. I'd be a lot less nice if I wasn't a Christian.

Why do you need to believe in God to be nice?
I donate both my time and money to charity and try to help the community and generally be a good person. However, I do it because it’s the right thing to do rather than because I am afraid of a mythical being