Soon to be Foster parents

[Vicki B.]

Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting for
the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is actually
doing foster care?

Vicki

[olfart]

"Vicki B." > wrote in message
et...
> Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting
for
> the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is
actually
> doing foster care?
>
> Vicki
>
Yes- Wife and I have fostered for over 4 years. There is alot more to it
than first meets the eye, but it has been a rewarding experience.
Unfortunately this newsgroup is not a good source for information on
fostering. The handful of posters who "hang out" here appear to have little
or no experience in actual fostering and most posts are concerned with
playing up negative aspects of the program. Very little info here is helpful
or constructive.
Since you are obviously interested in learning more about fostering - the
*good* and the *not so good* I might suggest that you check out
http://www.fosterparents.com/
There is alot of good info there and also many links to other sites that you
might find interesting and helpful. Good Luck and God Bless.

[Fern5827]

Both Bobb and Wex on this NG were fosters. Both were turned off by CPS'
absurdities and illegalities.

Vicki asked:

>Subject: Soon to be Foster parents
>From: "Vicki B."
>Date: 11/18/2003 7:13 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: >
>
>Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting for
>the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is actually
>doing foster care?
>
>Vicki
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

[Ron]

"Vicki B." > wrote in message
et...
> Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting
for
> the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is
actually
> doing foster care?
>
> Vicki


Hi ya Vicki,

The name is Ron, and I have been a foster parent for about 13 years. More
than 220 kids in that time. I currently have 2 boys and 1 girl in care.

Congratulations on your choice of becomming a foster parent, we need more of
them in this country. Please feel free to email with questions or concerns,
or just to say Hi.

Some good resources are below.

Ron

http://www.acf.dhhs.gov/
http://www.fosterparents.com
http://www.attach-bond.com/
http://www.parenting.org/

[Kane]

(Fern5827) wrote in message >...
> Both Bobb and Wex on this NG were fosters. Both were turned off by CPS'
> absurdities and illegalities.

Wex was in violation of his signed foster care contract which included
(and he heard it in his preservice training) those measures to protect
children and client privacy, when he called the media and gave an
interview.

Do you support foster parents making the decision on when to bring in
the media? Who has the legal responsibility for the child and their
safety and privacy?

As for bobb...don't make me laugh.

Read his stand on child sexual abuse if you want to figure out why
he's not foster parenting, and was "turned off by CPS' absurdities and
illegalities."

Seems he is turned off by legal absurdities like, "don't **** your
kids," as well. I'd say CPS is well rid of him. But with his attitude
extended out to the real world we can be sure you'd have yet more to
crow about over CPS errors. Keeping him fostering would be an error
big time.

Kane


>
> Vicki asked:
>
> >Subject: Soon to be Foster parents
> >From: "Vicki B."
> >Date: 11/18/2003 7:13 PM Eastern Standard Time
> >Message-id: >
> >
> >Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting for
> >the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is actually
> >doing foster care?
> >
> >Vicki
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >

[Simons Mom]

Vicki I am a foster parent have been for over a year. Feel free to email
meoff list if you like :)
We have 3 placements right now...a 15 year old girl a 17 year old boy
and a 2 year old boy
Shannon

[Gail Albrechtson]

Hi Vicki,

Congratulations on becoming a foster parent! I read with interest an article
about how foster parents are often criticized, misunderstood, over-stressed
and under-appreciated. More often than not, the only ones that make the
news are the ones who have done something wrong… such as abusing children in
their homes. As I continued to read the article, I decided that perhaps my
book could help change the negative images portrayed of foster parents and
foster care in general, hence, the reason for this letter.



Having been a young, single mom who was unable to take care of my infant,
she was placed in foster care. I have written a book, titled “Natural
Harmony: Jade’s Story,” which talks about our separation and eventual
reunion. My daughter’s foster parents played a large and important role in
our lives. In fact, if it weren’t for the support of such wonderful foster
parents, I likely would have never been reunited with my daughter. The story
presents foster parenting in a much truer light than what is often depicted
by society.



I’ve included below a direct link to the publisher’s website. I’d like to
mention that the excerpts on the webpage do not refer to foster care,
however, throughout the story, I’ve included a strong message about the
importance of foster parenting.



Gail

Web link to book:

www.trafford.com/robots/03-0761.html





"Vicki B." > wrote in message
et...
> Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now waiting
for
> the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone here who is
actually
> doing foster care?
>
> Vicki
>
>

[dickinson]

Vicki B. wrote:
> Hubby and I just signed off on our HS last week and are just now
> waiting for the head of the program to approve us. Is there anyone
> here who is actually doing foster care?
>
> Vicki

Hi Vicky,

Congrats. Yes I believe there are a few lurkers who are actually foster
carers, although the group rends to get swamped by "political stuff" and
everyday caring issues are few and far between. Hope things go ok for
you.

[dickinson]

Simons Mom wrote:
> Vicki I am a foster parent have been for over a year. Feel free to
> email meoff list if you like :)
> We have 3 placements right now...a 15 year old girl a 17 year old boy
> and a 2 year old boy
> Shannon

Shannon, are the boy and girl related? here in Queensland, Oz they don't
allow fostering in the same home of non-related opposite sexes.

[Simons Mom]

No they arent related. It does depend on the child and the issues but
here in the US they do allow different sex placements.


Shannon
Wife to Rick
FM to
W 15 years old
S 2 years old
B 17 years old

Low Carb Success
213/194/135

[dickinson]

Simons Mom wrote:
> No they arent related. It does depend on the child and the issues but
> here in the US they do allow different sex placements.

Mmmmmmm? Pretty risky in my experience. Constant supervision required as
the full issues are not always known. Nearly every child that has been
in my care had no case history of sexual abuse............nearly all of
them later disclosed sexual abuse and some of them even acted out.

kev

[dickinson]

Ron wrote:
<snip>
> Interesting. In all my experience these concerns have not really
> been given any thought. Not saying that I disbelieve, only that
> these ideas and reasons had not occurred to me. But the logic of
> them is there. As I apply that to my own family, I see the point.
> My 14 year old is not emotionally secure enough for sexual contact in
> my opinion, yet the state says (and I got this from a member of the
> local LEO last week so I know its current) that if she chooses to
> have sexual contact, that as long as the other party is 14 or more,
> and less than 19, then the state considers it consensual and not a
> crime. I'm fairly sure that most states have similar laws since
> Nebraska is a bit provincial IMO.
>
> If its not a crime then its not being reported as sexual abuse. But
> for a child that lacks the emotional development needed to begin a
> sexual relationship the question remains, is it a crime or not?
>
> I am of two minds about this one. As a father, who knows his child
> better than anyone else, I would say that it should be a crime. But
> as a foster parent, who has seen other females of this age begin
> their life as a sexual being, my opinion is that this is a normal
> part of growing up.
>
> Anyone else care to weigh in?

A "sticky wicket" this one. In simplistic terms, sexual abuse is
categorised as one person, acting in a sexual manner, over a
disadvanteged other, ie acting from a position of power.

That could be said of many relationships that I have seen, although the
relationship, in law, would probably not be seen as one of "the strong
and the weak".

As an example, a 16 yr old boy, with a history of violence, known to his
"lover", that "lover" being a 14 yr old girl of a passive nature, known
to be desperately seeking someone to love. Both with a "sexual history"
and both from abusive homes.

Would the girl be manipulating the boy? Would the boy be manipulating
the girl? Is the girl so desperate for love and attention that she would
"latch on to" the first boy that came along? Is the boy (because of his
background) so detatched and narcissistic that he would take sexual
advantage of the first girl that came along? If they have come from
families with a history of substance abuse are they *both* so
manipulative and cunning, that the powers that be would be hoodwinked by
them both? There could be a myriad of contributory factors that may
suggest it as an abusive relationship, but there could also be reasons
that would suggest that it could be a healthy relationship in that it
could teach both parties to care for each other and to "grow" in a
healthy manner.

What if the girl was 16 and the boy 14? Conservatives would probably
denounce the girl much more quickly than the boy, despite the indicators
of the boy's history of violence.

For myself, I consider age very relevant in these matters. The older one
is, the more likely it is that one can "use" someone younger.

kev

[Kane]

"dickinson" > wrote in message >...
> Ron wrote:
> <snip>
> > Interesting. In all my experience these concerns have not really
> > been given any thought. Not saying that I disbelieve, only that
> > these ideas and reasons had not occurred to me. But the logic of
> > them is there. As I apply that to my own family, I see the point.
> > My 14 year old is not emotionally secure enough for sexual contact in
> > my opinion, yet the state says (and I got this from a member of the
> > local LEO last week so I know its current) that if she chooses to
> > have sexual contact, that as long as the other party is 14 or more,
> > and less than 19, then the state considers it consensual and not a
> > crime. I'm fairly sure that most states have similar laws since
> > Nebraska is a bit provincial IMO.
> >
> > If its not a crime then its not being reported as sexual abuse. But
> > for a child that lacks the emotional development needed to begin a
> > sexual relationship the question remains, is it a crime or not?
> >
> > I am of two minds about this one. As a father, who knows his child
> > better than anyone else, I would say that it should be a crime. But
> > as a foster parent, who has seen other females of this age begin
> > their life as a sexual being, my opinion is that this is a normal
> > part of growing up.
> >
> > Anyone else care to weigh in?
>
> A "sticky wicket" this one. In simplistic terms, sexual abuse is
> categorised as one person, acting in a sexual manner, over a
> disadvanteged other, ie acting from a position of power.

It is sexual abuse anytime anyone tricks, traps, forces, or bribes
another into having sex. On the other hand there are circumstances
where it has been deemed normal...such as in typical courting
behaviors.

That does NOT equate with making it legal as being sensible.

It's normal to kill...really, it is. Yet we have very stringent rules
around it to the point we can break it down into legal and illegal
categories. Same with sex. Very normal...but we do have those
categories, now don't we.

> That could be said of many relationships that I have seen, although the
> relationship, in law, would probably not be seen as one of "the strong
> and the weak".
>
> As an example, a 16 yr old boy, with a history of violence, known to his
> "lover", that "lover" being a 14 yr old girl of a passive nature, known
> to be desperately seeking someone to love. Both with a "sexual history"
> and both from abusive homes.
>
> Would the girl be manipulating the boy? Would the boy be manipulating
> the girl?

Yes.

> Is the girl so desperate for love and attention that she would
> "latch on to" the first boy that came along?

Yes.

> Is the boy (because of his
> background) so detatched and narcissistic that he would take sexual
> advantage of the first girl that came along?

Yes.

> If they have come from
> families with a history of substance abuse are they *both* so
> manipulative and cunning, that the powers that be would be hoodwinked by
> them both?

Yes.

> There could be a myriad of contributory factors that may
> suggest it as an abusive relationship, but there could also be reasons
> that would suggest that it could be a healthy relationship in that it
> could teach both parties to care for each other and to "grow" in a
> healthy manner.

Mmmm...that could be stretching a tad. Two sickies do not make a
healthy, usually. Note the divorce rate.

> What if the girl was 16 and the boy 14? Conservatives would probably
> denounce the girl much more quickly than the boy, despite the indicators
> of the boy's history of violence.

Mmmmm. I'm not sure about the older girl thing, if she was only 16.
Oddly they would if she were 25, well, when I was kid...but
now...now, the women would get to do a number in jail.

> For myself, I consider age very relevant in these matters. The older one
> is, the more likely it is that one can "use" someone younger.

Yep...and where the law breaks down is when it tries to define to much
by age or power, rather than intent and event.

I know of a case of a 9 year old girl, that from from 9 to age 11,
sexually abused her 11 year old brother...she was extremely steet
smart and very controlling of everyone in her family. The boy was
threatened with being told on by the girl if he told or stopped having
sex with her. She had a strong hold on him in many ways outside of
sex.

The boy disclosed at 12 plus and was immediately charged, the girl not
as he didn't know how to convince anyone she was the aggressor...who
would have believed him.

Then a shrink the state assigned him to, a women with many years of
experience in sex abuse offender treatment woke everyone up. In a few
weeks of therapy she got that she as counseling a victim, not a perp.
His personality type, his communication style, his weak ego, all
tipped her off and the story came out.

Rare, but then it would be rare to catch such a perp. There is
considerable speculation, and a text on the subject somewhere, on the
prevalence of female perps of sexual abuse, and it's believed to be
much higher than the stats show us. Opportunity, rarely caught because
of disbelief by the populous.

> kev

Kane

[dickinson]

Kane wrote:
> "dickinson" > wrote in message
> >...
>> Ron wrote:
>> <snip>
>>> I am of two minds about this one. As a father, who knows his child
>>> better than anyone else, I would say that it should be a crime. But
>>> as a foster parent, who has seen other females of this age begin
>>> their life as a sexual being, my opinion is that this is a normal
>>> part of growing up.
>>>
>>> Anyone else care to weigh in?
>>
>> A "sticky wicket" this one. In simplistic terms, sexual abuse is
>> categorised as one person, acting in a sexual manner, over a
>> disadvanteged other, ie acting from a position of power.
>
> It is sexual abuse anytime anyone tricks, traps, forces, or bribes
> another into having sex.

A "dominant" personality is more likely to acheive this and *most*
dominance is acheived by age or hierarchal position, although not all.

On the other hand there are circumstances
> where it has been deemed normal...such as in typical courting
> behaviors.
>
> That does NOT equate with making it legal as being sensible.

Agreed.

> It's normal to kill...really, it is. Yet we have very stringent rules
> around it to the point we can break it down into legal and illegal
> categories. Same with sex. Very normal...but we do have those
> categories, now don't we.

Yup!

>> That could be said of many relationships that I have seen, although
>> the
>> relationship, in law, would probably not be seen as one of "the
>> strong
>> and the weak".
>>
>> As an example, a 16 yr old boy, with a history of violence, known to
>> his "lover", that "lover" being a 14 yr old girl of a passive
>> nature, known
>> to be desperately seeking someone to love. Both with a "sexual
>> history"
>> and both from abusive homes.
>>
>> Would the girl be manipulating the boy? Would the boy be manipulating
>> the girl?
>
> Yes.

>> Is the girl so desperate for love and attention that she would
>> "latch on to" the first boy that came along?
>
> Yes.
>
>> Is the boy (because of his
>> background) so detatched and narcissistic that he would take sexual
>> advantage of the first girl that came along?
>
> Yes.
>
>> If they have come from
>> families with a history of substance abuse are they *both* so
>> manipulative and cunning, that the powers that be would be
>> hoodwinked by
>> them both?
>
> Yes.
>
>> There could be a myriad of contributory factors that may
>> suggest it as an abusive relationship, but there could also be
>> reasons
>> that would suggest that it could be a healthy relationship in that it
>> could teach both parties to care for each other and to "grow" in a
>> healthy manner.
>
> Mmmm...that could be stretching a tad.

:-) Glad you see it. A social worker once suggested this at an
in-service and got laughed down by the carers present. She was accused
of PC psychobabble......I would say it would be nice *if*....but in
reality.....

>Two sickies do not make a
> healthy, usually. Note the divorce rate.

Agreed. The possibilities of one casualty managing to carry self and
"rescued" off the battlefield is minute.

>> What if the girl was 16 and the boy 14? Conservatives would probably
>> denounce the girl much more quickly than the boy, despite the
>> indicators
>> of the boy's history of violence.
>
> Mmmmm. I'm not sure about the older girl thing, if she was only 16.
> Oddly they would if she were 25, well, when I was kid...but
> now...now, the women would get to do a number in jail.

Probably. When I was a kid the girls used to target the older guys,
nowadays it seems the boys are targeting the older women. Both seem to
carry some status that I never did understand.

>> For myself, I consider age very relevant in these matters. The older
>> one
>> is, the more likely it is that one can "use" someone younger.
>
> Yep...and where the law breaks down is when it tries to define to much
> by age or power, rather than intent and event.

Easier to illustrate than intent?

> I know of a case of a 9 year old girl, that from from 9 to age 11,
> sexually abused her 11 year old brother...she was extremely steet
> smart and very controlling of everyone in her family. The boy was
> threatened with being told on by the girl if he told or stopped having
> sex with her. She had a strong hold on him in many ways outside of
> sex.
>
> The boy disclosed at 12 plus and was immediately charged, the girl not
> as he didn't know how to convince anyone she was the aggressor...who
> would have believed him.
>
> Then a shrink the state assigned him to, a women with many years of
> experience in sex abuse offender treatment woke everyone up. In a few
> weeks of therapy she got that she as counseling a victim, not a perp.
> His personality type, his communication style, his weak ego, all
> tipped her off and the story came out.
>
> Rare, but then it would be rare to catch such a perp. There is
> considerable speculation, and a text on the subject somewhere, on the
> prevalence of female perps of sexual abuse, and it's believed to be
> much higher than the stats show us. Opportunity, rarely caught because
> of disbelief by the populous.

Disbelief or just lack of disclosure? Are boys less likely to disclose
especially if abused by a female? I know that I was "entrapped" by
females 4 years older than myself before the age of 12. What could be
considered *more* shocking to some, is that both were cousins. I have
carried enough baggage from other events to not even consider how I felt
about this till now.

I do remember that we were caught on one occasion. I am guessing that
the reason that *I* was considered to be the perpetrator was because I
had been in care and my "parent's" side of the family weren't exactly
regarded with fondness.........tarred with the same brush, I suppose.

I have to admit that looking back on it, I think the experience was the
first time that I ever felt "valued" and needed, although I realise that
it was probably all part of "growing up" and I really don't feel as
though I was taken advantage of.....they were probably (I hope) just as
curious as I was.

[Kane]

On Fri, 28 Nov 2003 16:07:32 +1000, "dickinson"
> wrote:

>Kane wrote:
>> "dickinson" > wrote in message
>> >...
>>> Ron wrote:
>>> <snip>
>>>> I am of two minds about this one. As a father, who knows his
child
>>>> better than anyone else, I would say that it should be a crime.
But
>>>> as a foster parent, who has seen other females of this age begin
>>>> their life as a sexual being, my opinion is that this is a normal
>>>> part of growing up.
>>>>
>>>> Anyone else care to weigh in?
>>>
>>> A "sticky wicket" this one. In simplistic terms, sexual abuse is
>>> categorised as one person, acting in a sexual manner, over a
>>> disadvanteged other, ie acting from a position of power.
>>
>> It is sexual abuse anytime anyone tricks, traps, forces, or bribes
>> another into having sex.
>
>A "dominant" personality is more likely to acheive this and *most*
>dominance is acheived by age or hierarchal position, although not
all.
>
> On the other hand there are circumstances
>> where it has been deemed normal...such as in typical courting
>> behaviors.
>>
>> That does NOT equate with making it legal as being sensible.
>
>Agreed.
>
>> It's normal to kill...really, it is. Yet we have very stringent
rules
>> around it to the point we can break it down into legal and illegal
>> categories. Same with sex. Very normal...but we do have those
>> categories, now don't we.
>
>Yup!
>
>>> That could be said of many relationships that I have seen,
although
>>> the
>>> relationship, in law, would probably not be seen as one of "the
>>> strong
>>> and the weak".
>>>
>>> As an example, a 16 yr old boy, with a history of violence, known
to
>>> his "lover", that "lover" being a 14 yr old girl of a passive
>>> nature, known
>>> to be desperately seeking someone to love. Both with a "sexual
>>> history"
>>> and both from abusive homes.
>>>
>>> Would the girl be manipulating the boy? Would the boy be
manipulating
>>> the girl?
>>
>> Yes.
>
>>> Is the girl so desperate for love and attention that she would
>>> "latch on to" the first boy that came along?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> Is the boy (because of his
>>> background) so detatched and narcissistic that he would take
sexual
>>> advantage of the first girl that came along?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> If they have come from
>>> families with a history of substance abuse are they *both* so
>>> manipulative and cunning, that the powers that be would be
>>> hoodwinked by
>>> them both?
>>
>> Yes.
>>
>>> There could be a myriad of contributory factors that may
>>> suggest it as an abusive relationship, but there could also be
>>> reasons
>>> that would suggest that it could be a healthy relationship in that
it
>>> could teach both parties to care for each other and to "grow" in a
>>> healthy manner.
>>
>> Mmmm...that could be stretching a tad.
>
>:-) Glad you see it. A social worker once suggested this at an
>in-service and got laughed down by the carers present. She was
accused
>of PC psychobabble......I would say it would be nice *if*....but in
>reality.....
>
>>Two sickies do not make a
>> healthy, usually. Note the divorce rate.
>
>Agreed. The possibilities of one casualty managing to carry self and
>"rescued" off the battlefield is minute.
>
> >> What if the girl was 16 and the boy 14? Conservatives would probably
>>> denounce the girl much more quickly than the boy, despite the
>>> indicators
>>> of the boy's history of violence.
>>
>> Mmmmm. I'm not sure about the older girl thing, if she was only 16.
>> Oddly they would if she were 25, well, when I was kid...but
>> now...now, the women would get to do a number in jail.
>
>Probably. When I was a kid the girls used to target the older guys,
>nowadays it seems the boys are targeting the older women. Both seem
to
>carry some status that I never did understand.
>
>>> For myself, I consider age very relevant in these matters. The
older
>>> one
>>> is, the more likely it is that one can "use" someone younger.
>>
>> Yep...and where the law breaks down is when it tries to define to
much
>> by age or power, rather than intent and event.
>
>Easier to illustrate than intent?

I said "breaks down" not harder, or easier. An neither is easy. I just
prefer them not jumping on an age or a power differential. Lots of
folks have power differentials that shift. The judge is pretty
helpless with his threeyear old grandaughter sittin' on his lap asking
for a puppy.

That's why it should go to intent more.

>> I know of a case of a 9 year old girl, that from from 9 to age 11,
>> sexually abused her 11 year old brother...she was extremely steet
>> smart and very controlling of everyone in her family. The boy was
>> threatened with being told on by the girl if he told or stopped
having
>> sex with her. She had a strong hold on him in many ways outside of
>> sex.
>>
>> The boy disclosed at 12 plus and was immediately charged, the girl
not
>> as he didn't know how to convince anyone she was the
aggressor...who
>> would have believed him.
>>
>> Then a shrink the state assigned him to, a women with many years of
>> experience in sex abuse offender treatment woke everyone up. In a
few
>> weeks of therapy she got that she as counseling a victim, not a
perp.
>> His personality type, his communication style, his weak ego, all
>> tipped her off and the story came out.
>>
>> Rare, but then it would be rare to catch such a perp. There is
>> considerable speculation, and a text on the subject somewhere, on
the
>> prevalence of female perps of sexual abuse, and it's believed to be
>> much higher than the stats show us. Opportunity, rarely caught
because
>> of disbelief by the populous.
>
>Disbelief or just lack of disclosure?

The latter. Boys can't disclose because they very accurately sense or
know that they aren't likely to be believed, or they learn the hard
way, they are minimized or even ridiculed, even if only by a curled
lip on the part of the listener.

> Are boys less likely to disclose
>especially if abused by a female?

Big time YES! Much less likely. It is so socially incongruent that a
boy is powerless that they block it. I worked with some 80 or so teen
boys in residential treatment. Their case files showed them to have
been victims...but they had not disclosed..ever, themselves. They did
not while in treatment either. About one third were victims of female
molestation of them.

>I know that I was "entrapped" by
>females 4 years older than myself before the age of 12. What could be
>considered *more* shocking to some, is that both were cousins. I have
>carried enough baggage from other events to not even consider how I
felt
>about this till now.

I have seen perfectly willing boys seduced by cousins...this is
nothing new, that for years thought they were the ones in power, only
to sort it out later...and be quite shocked when they realized that
the girls were the ones in power...but the...the relationship between
men and women isn't all that easy to sort out, shifting powerwise. R

>I do remember that we were caught on one occasion. I am guessing that
>the reason that *I* was considered to be the perpetrator was because
I
>had been in care and my "parent's" side of the family weren't exactly
>regarded with fondness.........tarred with the same brush, I suppose.

Goes to the incredible lengths the adult caregives will go to to
minimize and deny. Anything but the truth.

>I have to admit that looking back on it, I think the experience was
the
>first time that I ever felt "valued" and needed, although I realise
that
>it was probably all part of "growing up" and I really don't feel as
>though I was taken advantage of.....they were probably (I hope) just
as
>curious as I was.

You'd question that as a fact? R R R R R....

I knew, even waaaay back when I was a lad of 12, that the major
predatory child molesters in the neighborhood were girls. Hell, we all
knew and the neighborhood boys, dying to get laid, were ****ed that
they tended to invite only little kids to their darkened garage "tea
parties." We had to be satisfied with very lousely lite peeking.

The girls knew what was up with the risks...R R R

And they were quite obviously just as curious as we were.

Kane

[Simons Mom]

I am very aware of the backgrounds available to me. I am aware that one
of my children has a sexual abuse background...she being the victim. I
am also not a dummy. The kids are never home alone together..for
one...for two...If W didnt make the amazing progress she has in 8 months
B would not be here.
As for B he has zero history since the age of nine of inappropriate
sexual activity or acting out with other fosters. Foster Care itself is
a risk.....period.


Re: Soon to be Foster parents

Group: alt.support.foster-parents Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2003, 7:45pm
(EST+15) From: (dickinson)
Simons Mom wrote:
No they arent related. It does depend on the child and the issues but
here in the US they do allow different sex placements.

Mmmmmmm? Pretty risky in my experience. Constant supervision required as
the full issues are not always known. Nearly every child that has been
in my care had no case history of sexual abuse............nearly all of
them later disclosed sexual abuse and some of them even acted out.
kev


Shannon
Wife to Rick
FM to
W 15 years old
S 2 years old
B 17 years old

Low Carb Success
213/194/135

[dickinson]

Simons Mom wrote:
> I am very aware of the backgrounds available to me.

I truly hope so. Family Services are renowned for not giving the full
history of children in care to potential carers. That aside, often, the
full history simply isn't known because the children haven't disclosed.

> I am aware that
> one of my children has a sexual abuse background...she being the
> victim.

And victims often become perpetrators. As Kane has pointed out, sexual
abuse isn't only perpetrated by males.

>I am also not a dummy.

I'm sure that you're not.

> The kids are never home alone
> together..for one...for two...

Good. That's how it is in my household.......even though the oppsite
sexes are siblings.

>If W didnt make the amazing progress
> she has in 8 months B would not be here.

Credit to you for W's progress......she didn't do it on her own you know
:-)

> As for B he has zero history since the age of nine of inappropriate
> sexual activity or acting out with other fosters. Foster Care itself
> is a risk.....period.

You said it! Good luck, Shannon.




> Re: Soon to be Foster parents
>
> Group: alt.support.foster-parents Date: Thu, Nov 27, 2003, 7:45pm
> (EST+15) From: (dickinson)
> Simons Mom wrote:
> No they arent related. It does depend on the child and the issues but
> here in the US they do allow different sex placements.
>
> Mmmmmmm? Pretty risky in my experience. Constant supervision required
> as the full issues are not always known. Nearly every child that has
> been in my care had no case history of sexual abuse............nearly
> all of them later disclosed sexual abuse and some of them even acted
> out.
> kev
>
>
> Shannon
> Wife to Rick
> FM to
> W 15 years old
> S 2 years old
> B 17 years old
>
> Low Carb Success
> 213/194/135