Kane
November 19th 03, 11:03 PM
On Wed, 19 Nov 2003 21:38:35 GMT, "bobb" > wrote:
>All too common... happens all the time.
Oh, that foster parent adopt children that no one else, usually, would
want with any kind of subsidy no matter how big? Yeah, I've seen that
too. I've helped a few of them.
Children so disabled by exposure to drugs and alcohol in utero that
they will never function adequately to care for themselves. Children
with holes in their internal organs. Children brain damaged from
shaken baby syndrom. Children so psychologically damaged they present
extreme danger to themselves and others and may, or may not, over time
recover - fire setters, sexual predators, violent acting out in rage,
etc.
Yet those money grubbing foster parents keep adopting them....for a
subsidy that drops upon finalization to less than the foster subsidy.
Must be out of their minds. But be that as it may I just can't help
admiring them for taking on what THE REST OF YOU ASSHOLES IN THIS NG
HAVEN'T THE GUTS FOR BUT HAVE THE TEMERITY TO LIE ABOUT.
>That's one reason I have always
>felt foster parents (inlcuding myself) did not need an increase in
payments.
Then why aren't you doing it for free....still?
>I've seen too many foster parents
How many?
But then ONE would be "too many" you sly posting rascal you...r r r r
>already on welfare and just felt they were
>trying to supplement their incomes by taking on the responsibility of
a
>foster child.. a responsibility they did not need in the first place.
People in your neck of the woods can be certified for foster care
while on welfare? Boy that has to be a first.
The first thing folks calling in to inquire about becoming foster
parents are asked in all the states I've surveyed is, "What is your
income and is it sufficient to support you and your family without the
foster subsidy?"
I surveyed by making the inquiry calls myself...and outside of my name
and location that, income source and level, was among the first few
questions.
That sound like they are looking to certify welfare recipients to you?
What state is that where they use welfare recipients for foster care
givers, bobb...or are you maybe shading the truth just a tad?
On the other hand, I've seen people that got so skilled at fostering
severely damaged children that they finally, at the urging of CPS, had
to accept more difficult children on the agreement with an agency that
they'd have to quite their jobs and take on enough to replace the
income, but boy, not many people would want to take on that difficult
or damaged a batch of children.
Usually the limit is about 6 of that particular population. And they
have to have TWO parents in the household to qualify..so one gets to
work but must be there to back up the primary.
Yah know bobb, I have a suggestion. I suggest the people reading what
you and your Stumpy friend say about fosters make some calls of their
own and ask questions about fostering. I've found that the states are
very willing to share lots of information that says you are blowin' it
out your asses.
Yah know, bobb, I have this odd feeling that you could be lying about
having been a foster parent....or that you got out of it for some very
interesting reason or reasons. You make some very strange claims.
How is it that you and Ron, and for that matter some other foster
parents that post here and to asfp, have such a different experience?
I know he has his gripes with the agency, but he doesn't seem to have
a view similar to yours on the monetary or even other aspects of
fostering, including the children and their parents.
Could it be one of you is lying?
Wanna take bets on who I think is the most likely culprit?
Or you are dumb as A Stump...oh wait, you could be honest after all.
>
>bobb
>
Kane
>All too common... happens all the time.
Oh, that foster parent adopt children that no one else, usually, would
want with any kind of subsidy no matter how big? Yeah, I've seen that
too. I've helped a few of them.
Children so disabled by exposure to drugs and alcohol in utero that
they will never function adequately to care for themselves. Children
with holes in their internal organs. Children brain damaged from
shaken baby syndrom. Children so psychologically damaged they present
extreme danger to themselves and others and may, or may not, over time
recover - fire setters, sexual predators, violent acting out in rage,
etc.
Yet those money grubbing foster parents keep adopting them....for a
subsidy that drops upon finalization to less than the foster subsidy.
Must be out of their minds. But be that as it may I just can't help
admiring them for taking on what THE REST OF YOU ASSHOLES IN THIS NG
HAVEN'T THE GUTS FOR BUT HAVE THE TEMERITY TO LIE ABOUT.
>That's one reason I have always
>felt foster parents (inlcuding myself) did not need an increase in
payments.
Then why aren't you doing it for free....still?
>I've seen too many foster parents
How many?
But then ONE would be "too many" you sly posting rascal you...r r r r
>already on welfare and just felt they were
>trying to supplement their incomes by taking on the responsibility of
a
>foster child.. a responsibility they did not need in the first place.
People in your neck of the woods can be certified for foster care
while on welfare? Boy that has to be a first.
The first thing folks calling in to inquire about becoming foster
parents are asked in all the states I've surveyed is, "What is your
income and is it sufficient to support you and your family without the
foster subsidy?"
I surveyed by making the inquiry calls myself...and outside of my name
and location that, income source and level, was among the first few
questions.
That sound like they are looking to certify welfare recipients to you?
What state is that where they use welfare recipients for foster care
givers, bobb...or are you maybe shading the truth just a tad?
On the other hand, I've seen people that got so skilled at fostering
severely damaged children that they finally, at the urging of CPS, had
to accept more difficult children on the agreement with an agency that
they'd have to quite their jobs and take on enough to replace the
income, but boy, not many people would want to take on that difficult
or damaged a batch of children.
Usually the limit is about 6 of that particular population. And they
have to have TWO parents in the household to qualify..so one gets to
work but must be there to back up the primary.
Yah know bobb, I have a suggestion. I suggest the people reading what
you and your Stumpy friend say about fosters make some calls of their
own and ask questions about fostering. I've found that the states are
very willing to share lots of information that says you are blowin' it
out your asses.
Yah know, bobb, I have this odd feeling that you could be lying about
having been a foster parent....or that you got out of it for some very
interesting reason or reasons. You make some very strange claims.
How is it that you and Ron, and for that matter some other foster
parents that post here and to asfp, have such a different experience?
I know he has his gripes with the agency, but he doesn't seem to have
a view similar to yours on the monetary or even other aspects of
fostering, including the children and their parents.
Could it be one of you is lying?
Wanna take bets on who I think is the most likely culprit?
Or you are dumb as A Stump...oh wait, you could be honest after all.
>
>bobb
>
Kane