 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 
|
|
 |
||||||||||||||||
|
Bar News - April 6, 2001 New Adoption and Safe Families Act is Working for Children By: Willard G. Martin Editor’s Note: This article was written by Laconia District Court Judge Williard Martin in response to a Concord Monitor article detailing the unsuccessful efforts of a couple that had taken care of a young boy to be reunited with him after he entered the foster care system.I READ THE sad story of Ryan reported in the March 5 Monitor under the headline "Boy Finds, Then Loses a Family." As a district court and family division judge, I am part of the "system" that reportedly bungled Ryan’s case by not seeing that he was promptly and safely placed in a permanent home. Maybe it did. I don’t know, as I am not the judge on Ryan’s matter and I have no knowledge of the facts except as reported in the press. If there is another side to the story, it cannot be told. The Division of Children, Youth and Family personnel and court assigned to Ryan’s case are prohibited by law from speaking. However, Ryan’s story raises the fundamental question: Isn’t Ryan entitled to a permanent placement in a loving and safe family? Yes, he is! Let’s take a minute to explore what is being done for kids in Ryan’s circumstances. I am happy to report that both the federal and state government recently passed laws guaranteeing an abused or neglected child a permanent placement within 12 months of entering the system. The federal act, which New Hampshire has signed onto, is called the Adoption and Safe Family Act. It addresses a longstanding problem in our system. Before the act, if a child was abused or neglected and removed from his or her home, the system worked without time limit to assist the parent to correct the abusive or neglectful conduct. For example, if a parent were abusing substances and neglecting a child, the system removed the child and offered rehabilitation services to the parent. The goal was to reunify the child with the parent. The problem was that this effort at rehabilitation was often measured in years rather than months. In the meantime, the child was languishing in placement. Often there would be several different placements. Often there would be repeated efforts at reunification. For a child this uncertainty was devastating. In short, the system paid too much attention to the parent’s need for rehabilitation and too little attention to the effect on the child. To implement the Adoption and Safe Family Act, the various components of the child welfare system have worked diligently on protocols for permanency. As soon as a court makes a finding of abuse or neglect, the clock starts ticking. A written plan is approved by the court. The parent knows what conduct must change. The parent is directed to community-based services to address the abusive or neglectful conduct. If the parent is abusing substances, referral would be made to substance abuse services. As the process proceeds, everyone is working to reunify parent and child. But—and it is a big but—the parent is advised that failure to correct the abusive or neglectful conduct will result in the permanent placement of the child with another family. If permanent placement is necessary, preference will be for adoption, the most permanent possible placement. A final permanency hearing must be held within 12 months of an out-of-home placement. To be prepared if the parent does not correct the abusive or neglectful conduct, the system may institute concurrent planning. For instance, if the division’s child protection worker is in doubt as to whether the parent will correct the abusive or neglectful conduct, possible adoptive families will be identified. To minimize the trauma to the child, often the identified option is within the child’s extended family or the foster family caring for the child. As a 29-year veteran of the system with all of its frailties, I think the Adoption and Safe Family Act was long overdue. It truly balances the rights of the parent with the right of every child to have a permanent, nurturing environment. On the facts as told to the Monitor, Ryan may have had nurture with his foster family, but clearly he did not have permanency. Now that the Division of Child, Youth and Family has interceded, I am confident that Ryan will have a permanent home. Whether that will be with his mother, if she corrects her neglectful conduct, or as a permanent placement with his godmother or another family, it must occur within 12 months. That is the good news. Ryan deserves nothing less. That will be a happy ending to a sad story. Willard G. Martin is a justice in Laconia District Court and serves as a judge in the Plymouth and Lebanon family division courts. His law firm, Martin, Lord & Osman, is located in Laconia. This article originally appeared in the March 11, 2001 issue of the Concord Sunday Monitor and is reprinted with permission of the author and publication. |
|
Home | About the Bar | For Members | For the Public | Legal Links | Publications | Online Store New Hampshire Bar Association |
