It is in the state’s financial interest for children from troubled families to live with their grandparents rather than be in foster care. And it’s usually better for the child, too. So it was smart for the 2006 Legislature to approve a program that helps low-income grandparents with some of the costs of raising their grandchildren. Under the program, which Gov. Kathleen Sebelius is expected to sign, grandparents with a household income of 130 percent of the federal poverty level may qualify to receive $200 a month per grandchild, with a $600 limit. In comparison, the state spends about $600 a month per child for foster care.
Posted by Phillip Brownlee
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
21 Comments
As a conservative Republican, I was appreciative that our governor is in favor of grandparents rather than foster parents taking over the rearing of children and being supported by the state in doing so. This is a step in the right direction. Too many children have been abused in foster situations.
I absolutely agree Dick. I think it is a great idea to make use of and support grandparents in this. One thing I would add is to tweak the system to make it easier for grandparents to claim their grandkids as dependents in such a situation.
There are sicker kids (in a psychiatric sense) in more foster homes than ever before and there are many foster families making heroic efforts to help these kids.
I agree that grandparents willing to help with their grandkids need to have easier access to these kids when it is easier to help them. Too often grandparents are not able to step in for their grandkids until those kids are pretty damaged by abuse and/or neglect.
While I agree that abuse does occur in foster homes and that is an especially tragic thing given the abuse history of many of those kids. My sense is the majority of foster families are doing their best without a lot of incentive for doing so.
I also think grandparents willing to step up should be given more funds than $200 per month. The biggest benefit the state provides to these grandparents is Medicaid coverage (which is no small thing given how much these kids typically cost in this area).
..but still many of you pious republicans think the kids are better off in foster care than with two loving and capable adoptive parents who might be gay.
Kansas, as wingnutty as you think!
As a former foster parent, it sounds like a great idea. These kids should be kept with their families as much as possible, as long as it is a safe and nurturing environment.
The grandparents should still have to go through the foster care training, of course, to verify their capabilities….and their backgrounds checked to ensure that the apple fell far enough away from the tree, and that the children are actually going to a better environment.
Good point Greg!We need to make sure that the Grandparents didn’t do something that screwed up the parents that screwed up the kids. But it would be best for kids to stay with family. Maybe not just grandparents but maybe an aunt or uncle (even if they are homosexual).
Good points all. Interesting that we have basic viewpoints ranging from left to right with so much agreement. I suspect that meny of us are parents/aunts/uncles/grandparents and habe ‘been there done that’ to some extent.
Let’s see, if you are a loving grandparent, you get only $2400 per child annually, but if you are a stranger, you get $7200 per child. This makes good sense–to anyone who is clinically insane or morally bankrupt.
I’m not saying every grandparent should receive an automatic payment. Have social services evaluate the home. If it passes muster, drop the household income limit, and pay grandparents as much as we pay foster-care households. Or, maybe, if some intelligence were exercised, a bit more, to encourage a shift to qualified-grandparent child-raising.
Of course, one can argue that the grandparents generated irresponsible kids, who then foisted a burden on society-at-large by procreating as teenagers. That’s why inspection and evaluation is in order. But sometimes grandparents who became parents too young, have gained wisdom that they didn’t have when they were young. You have to determine the ones who have, and the ones who haven’t.
Heartlander,My first thought was how it was wrongly incentifized. Not all grandparents are able or willing to take on the parental role, however. But as I say above, I think they should get more than they currently do.
I also want to think that if I were in a similar situation, which thank God I have not been, that I would believe that I had a familial obligation to help my descendents over and above what the state was willing to give me for my trouble.
Helping out my family enhances me in its own right.
Hope that made sense.
Good points DD. But Kansas family values apparantly only kick in when the money is right.
I confess I don’t know a lot about orphanages. I know my father didn’t have good things to say about them. He was never in one but dated girls from one. They related some pretty hard stories.
This is a good move by the State. We can quarrel over helping grandparents doing the family thing for the family reason vs paying them to do it. But those are details.
Another idea? Rather than orphanages, why not let some senior care homes care for some of the kids? Imagine the opportunities for a child with dozens of “grandparents”! Think of the light and energy a child would give them in return!
I see we have the beginning of a new welfare program here, all because it’s once again justified as ‘in the state’s financial interest’. And of course it only helps the ‘poor’. This is election year politics, plain and simple. The right-wingers get some projected savings and the left-wingers get a new government program/benefit. The legislature could care less about the children SRS has already taken custody of, much less what happens after that. This action is just a campaign footnote for this fall’s elections.
Where do I get these conclusions? Common sense. SRS has been around in one form or another for decades. Any real reform should have been done long ago.
On a slightly different note, I would be insulted as the Eagle for not having the story and then linking to another paper for it on this blog.
Tim Talley, Associated PressSaturday, May 20, 2006 / 04:08 PMOKLAHOMA CITY — A federal judge struck down a 2-year-old law that prohibits Oklahoma from recognizing adoptions by same-sex couples from other states and countries.
U.S. District Judge Robin Cauthron ruled Friday the measure violated due process rights under the U.S. Constitution because it attempted to break up families without considering the parents’ fitness or the children’s best interests.”
And how does the right respond? Typically, by taking a swipe at the courts. Sore losers.
“It’s another case of an activist court trying to legislate from the bench,” said Republican Rep. Thad Balkman. “It’s unfortunate that a single judge is trying to rewrite the law.”
I see. They’ve done so well with the presidency and the congress that now they should control the courts too?
Sounds like kansas.
Actually, I don’t think orphanages are a bad idea. Of course they wouldn’t be like the ones years ago. They could be run by qualified staff who could provide the children with love, support, nurturing, and the discipline they need. Think about it, the parents who abandoned them for whatever reason were raised by the grandparents, and often abuse and family dysfunction is handed down for generations. In many cases, having grandparents raise the kids may not be a good idea.I’ve seen alot of abuse and neglect in foster homes, and many foster families are just in it for the money. Orphanages would be run with state and federal money, could be tightly regulated, and only throughly screened and qualified staff would be allowed to work there. It could be better than the system that’s in place now.
As a former foster child and current child advocate:
Kinship care (placement with extended family members) can be a good thing if:
-Safety checks are done-Caseworker visits are frequent-Counseling is provided
Many times, in kinship placements, these three things do not occur. Why? Because the state is looking to save money.
For example: If a parent is abusive, and this abuse stems from a family pattern, perhaps those particular grandparents might not be the best placement for the child.
Likewise: If a foster family needs economic and emotional support from the state when taking in a troubled child (or sibling group), a kinship placement might also require accompanying financial and emotional resources.
What’s the bottom line?a.) Cash is kingorb.) The best interests of the child
Again, as a former foster child who grew up in group foster homes…
*Please see http://www.sunshinegirlonarainyday.com
Regarding orphanages, they also might be a good thing if staff were screened.
There is no incest taboo with foster homes. There is no incest taboo with institutional care.
However, because there is safety in numbers, it might be easier for a young lady to come of age in a group facility than an individual home.
Sorry to bring this up… but when you are a foster child and “blossoming,” sometimes male staff take notice. That is an incredibly vulnerable position to be in.
I’ve not seen your nic before Lisa. Welcome to our forum. It seems you have a first person perspective as to this.
Sorry to inject realism into this discussion, but one of the things you have to take into account when placing a child is that often the grandparents are the ones that made their parents unfit to raise them.
My point exactly, Jed.
Please visit this site regarding lack of support for kinship foster placements:
http://www.chapinhall.org/article_abstract.aspx?ar=1427&L2=61&L3=131
This report from Chapin Hall reveals that:
One-third of grandparents reported experiencing person symptoms of depression
-Two-thirds were caring for grandchildren whom they identified as having emotional or behavioral problems.
-Half of the families had no involvement with a child welfare agency.
-Less than a third of the grandchildren and only a handful of the grandmothers were currently receiving mental health services.
Let’s be honest and say: “It’s cheaper for the government to foist the children off on the grandparents.”
But let’s not pretend that it is always in the best interest of the child.
From Lisa, former foster child & current child advocate
*Feel free to visit my blog sometime: http://sunshinegirlonarainyday.blogspot.com/