Re: Termination of parental rights

[PatrickMB2@xxxxxxx]

Joyce, I don't believe you overstated the way many states, their attorneys, 
agency management and caseworkers interpreted the mandate to be 
"reunification of families at all costs." As a Guardian ad litem, I soon 
learned that it has never been the best interest of the child that is the 
controlling factor. Rather, if a home can be made MINIMALLY acceptable the 
child is returned. And minimal is often set very low indeed. 

One thing the "new" federal initiatives did do was to bring children back to 
the court's attention for permanent placement at a much earlier time. Parents 
can no longer wait until just before an annual hearing and suddenly begin 
doing a bit toward their treatment plan. Instead, now there is some pressure 
to begin a real effort to change at a much earlier time. Significant efforts 
with demonstrable results now have to be made much earlier. However, even 
now, although the guidelines say the children should have a permanent 
placement plan after a year, that just means the termination begins at that 
point. After another 9-12-18 months the children may actually get into 
permanent placement. But, it is at least a good beginning. Unfortunately, 
when the Kellogg funds which paid for the attorneys needed to bringing the 
termination proceedings ran out, many states (including mine) are again 
falling behind. And children wait.

Pat Curran
Guardian ad litem