Why Are Adoption Rates In The U.S Decreasing?

There are many factors to why this is happening and it was interesting to uncover why there is a difference of thousands of children not being adopted compared to the early 2000’s. I learned that the main reasons have to do with modern acceptance and not having negative stigma around what women choose to do with their children, and also prices have changed the chances of children being adopted internationally. New Fees Make Intercountry Adoption More Expensive. (2018, February 6). Retrieved from https://www.adoptioncouncil.org/blog/2018/02/new-fees-make-intercountry-adoption-more-expensive.

The National Council for Adoption sent out a press release on international adoptions prices rising. On February 1st, 2018 on the U.S department of state released a statement saying that international adoptions prices were rising by a “triple-digit percentage increase in accreditation fees.” Chuck Johnson the president and CEO of NCFA spoke on the issue saying that it will lead to less children being adopted and that the department of state adoption division have a destructive policy that will make international adoption unaffordable. Johnson speaks again on the matter saying that the Department of State has failed in leadership causing many international adoptions to decline tragically annually, and that many orphans worldwide in need of a family will never have one because families in the U.S simply can’t afford it.

I think that this is a major cause of why adoption rates are dropping drastically. It’s beginning to become really unaffordable. The families who do want to adopt aren’t because the prices are drastically rising. And the ones who are suffering the most are orphans who will never find a loving home. There was no author to this blog, but it seems to share the viewpoint of the CEO and President of NSFA Chuck Johnson on the matter of the U.S Department of State’s decisions.

Graff starts off with strong by saying that many children from Guatemala were adopted by U.S families between 1998 and 2008. In those years Graff states that 30,000 children were adopted, so 1 in 100 children born in Guatemala was adopted by U.S families. But the background story to this isn’t as happy as it seems. Graff claims that this was a corrupt way for people to make money. Graff says that many of the children were bought, kidnapped, or coerced away from families that actually wanted to raise them. Graff mentions a story written by Erin Seigal called Finding Fernanda A story about an American mother who unknowingly adopted two kidnapped children from a guatemalan mother. Graff mentions an investigation of a guatemalan woman who in the span of three years gave up 33 children to adoption. She claimed that all of them were hers. No one questioned anything because she was going by the legal limit to put children up for adoption. Graff also mentions that the corruption would go as far as doctors and nurses who would tell the young mothers their child died at birth.

This is one of the major reasons why the U.S has blocked adopting from Guatemala. The corruptness of baby trafficking was getting extreme. It’s not just Guatemala whose this corrupt in adoption. It makes sense to why international adoption is being well regulated now and prices are rising to adopt these children who might not be orphans at all.

The Truth About Inter Racial Adoption

It seems to be that in so many other ways we say colour doesn’t matter anymore, so why should it matter in bringing up a child? It’s not as though white parents can’t tell children about their background and culture, and make them aware of that. There are two ways of looking at the debate triggered by the children’s minister Tim Loughton, after he said there should be no barrier to minority children being adopted by white parents.

If there are, to quote the minister, ‘no other issues’, minority children can be and are adopted by white parents. If, Tim Loughton, is rowing back from this, and saying that it doesn’t matter how the ethnic heritage of adoptive parents and adoptive children marry up, then I think he’s making a mistake.

I believe most people would agree that, if you had a choice of two loving families, and one reflected the child’s background and the other didn’t, that it would be sensible to place the child with the family who matched them ethnically. It feels to me that the government is at risk of oversimplifying the needs of adoptees: any child going through adoption has a complicated set of circumstances, but over the last few years there has been more acknowledgement that love isn’t enough, that there has to be more understanding of the child’s ethnic and other needs at the centre of the story. (Moorhead, J. and Muir, H., 2020)

According to the news article, Loughton ‘said too many children languish in care because social workers hold out for ‘the perfect match”, the result being that ‘ethnic minority children are over-represented among the young people in care who never find permanent homes’. The action now required is for government and mainstream agencies, such as Barnado’s, to demonstrate how they have made a difference to the lives of black and minority ethnic children, and how they intend to address the real issues over the coming years.

For example, evidence throughout the last two decades has shown minority ethnic families with children as being at greater risk of experiencing poverty, and the associated risks, than their white counterparts. Second, the evidence on how long black and minority ethnic children wait for adoption is not explored.

Jane Rowe’s study, Children Who Wait (published in 1973), showed that black and minority ethnic children, as well as disabled children, waited longer. But anyone familiar with the evidence will be able to tell that black and minority ethnic children have always waited longer.

He suggested that there are two ways of looking at the debate triggered by the children’s minister, Tim Loughton, after he said there should be no barrier to minority children being adopted by white parents. First, they perpetuate the usual stereotypes of adoption through the images of happy, cuddly, non-disabled babies, when we know a majority of the children waiting for adoption are older, more likely to be disabled and more likely to have complex social and health needs.

After all, for ethnic minority children, ‘the wait is three times as long as for white children’. So those who now suggest that longer waiting times are the result of a ‘rigid line’ to match the ethnicity of adoptee and adopter – as Barnardo’s chief executive Martin Narey claimed – need to explain why this pattern has persisted for at least 40 years, long before this policy came to public attention in the late 1980s. (Dutt, R., 2020.)

Adoption: Is It Really That Bad Or Is It Not Really That Bad?

There are 20,000 adoptions from Russia yearly and over 1.6 million from the world a year, coming from an adoptive child myself from Russia, I Believe strongly in adoption and believe that it is hard to adopt children in this day and age. It is a very controversial topic in the world today. ‘A total of approximately 125,000 children have been adopted annually in the United States in recent years, a sharp drop since the century-long high point of 175,000 adoptions in 1970.’ (Herman,uoregon.edu,Para.4). I am in favor with adoption and value the importance of it now. Adoption makes way for so called 2nd chances for children and opportunities. Some people argue that adoption is not right due to certain Faiths and unstable outcomes. Some points that i am covering is the costs of adoption, the legal actions, behavioral issues, and Ethics.

Many people today have concerns of adoption internationally due to the costs of adoption. people for adoption argue that the costs of adoption are set at a marginal level so that most parents who want to adopt a child can, an example is to ‘file with the adoption agency it is about $5,800 dollars on average, plus 2 travel trips, one 4-7 days and the second trip 9-14 days which can rage to 3,000 dollars’. (http://www.ftia.org, Pg. 1). Overall, the trip costing about 13,000 dollars by the end. And people arguing against adoption believe that costs for a newborn isn’t as pricey. ‘Between 9,000 to 25,000 dollars as an average cost to deliver a newborn which is significantly higher.’ (Parker/Media, Pg. 1&2). Many people adopt, when medically cannot have children and the option to adopt opens up it is a cost-efficient way to save a life and or change one. Adoption is also a way to open your arms to someone who is not from where you are it is someone from china or Russia, many children are put into adoption due to overly large families such as 9 or more children and cannot afford them they then put them up for adoption and adoptees have the option to choose what child they want and give them a home and place to learn new cultures.

The Dave Thomas foundation stated that ‘adoption for single parents is nearly impossible due to the costs’ (Debra, DTF.com, pg. 1) but due to now and the economy today its harder to raise a newborn with costs, but adoptive children ages range from 2 to 6 and the older the child the lower the costs to raise due to maternal costs of newborn. yes i do agree that it is easier to adopt a child with 2 parents a double income, ‘in 2014 vs 1999 cost of raising a newborn is a difference of $8,000 in the year 2000 vs $25,000 today’ (money.cnn.com, Para.3) while adoption costs in 2000 vs today has only been a range of only a couple thousand.

When talking to my mother about adoption costs she stated that she was a single mother and adopted me when I was 5 years old and paid around roughly 15,000 which is still under if you gave birth to your child. My mom also said that legal Laws for adoption area lot more heinous vs the cost. The cost can vary due to where you adopt and the time and also the governments and what costs they put on adoption. I was adopted in 1994 and it was 15,000 today it’s a little more like 18,000 but still is below maternal costs. Overall price for adoption is low and many adoptee parent’s art fixed on the price more so of the legal parts to adoption.

There are Many Legal Binding when talking about adoption, well it has to be you are keeping the child, there are various adoption laws enlace for both the adoptees and the child’s birth parents many people are confused on these legal issues such as ‘(TPR) which is termination of parental rights which a judge decrees that permanently ends all legal involvement of birth parents to child.'(adopt.org, PGI) many people against adoption find this stuff annoying and things they don’t want to go through. Many researchers on international and domestic Adoption find that the so called ‘Legal Checklist’ is the toughest part of adoption and argue that there are no such thing for newborns, It is rigorous but are necessary to ensure a smooth transition into the area this list gives a generic list reviewing the courts of adoption to finalize everything, Such as periodic review of a child’s case, the termination of the birthparents’ parental rights, setting a goal for a child’s future, reviewing that goal periodically, changing the goal, if necessary, from reunification with the birth family to adoption, finalizing the child’s adoption’ (adopt.org, PG 1).

Every Country and state have their own laws ad guidelines on adoption which can make it difficult to go through the process of adoption but all guidelines must be met and agree with both governments, i can also argue that it only takes 2 days to clear up all the legal issues that adoption brings along with it and after 2 days were over that was it the adoption process was over. most people don’t understand what adoption takes up it may be cheaper but its also a promise that the child u get you will car for it like it was your own and that it is your and you as the adoptee must agree to that.

Behavioral issues are probably the biggest controversy on the subject of adoption, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry stated that Approximately 120,000 children are adopted each year in the United States. Children with physical, developmental, or emotional handicaps who were once considered unacceptable are now being adopted (‘special needs adoptions’). but questions arise such as when should the adoptive parents tell the child there adopted and how do you know if they’re going to have behavioral issues? almost all adoptive children who get adopted at 5 or older have or are going to have behavioral problems.

Most kids that are 5 or older have their culture tied into them enough and then after taking them out of that place the child is confused in reverts to a premature stage. Where the child needs to learn from the beginning for that culture how to act, the values in the rules and the guidelines to live in that society without any problems.

Not only is their behavior problems but there are also emotional problems, some children can’t remember what their parents would like so older kids that get adopted have a harder time detaching themselves from their biological parents and have a hard time integrating themselves with their adoptive parents. This is common among adoption. But before a child is adopted parents usually go through a whole emotional and behavioral workshop with a learn how to interact a child how to cope with child so the child can be better suited for what is to come. I asked my mother she went to any classes and she said she did she went to three action and they told her what to expect from me when I got there and they said that one very simple thing to pretend that you are the mother, not so much is to pretend but you are the mother. Because the closer that you can become with the child the easier the transition will be the adoptive child. There’re many spectrums have to wear emotional and behavioral problems have a clear line gone right down the middle. It’s not really clearly stated. It depends on the child what the child has been through. To determine the extent of the problems. But for children that are three or four or two or one. There are no issues because the child is too young to develop any emotional problems. The child to be raised just as a baby, and the child look just like everyone else around him.

When I was adopted, I was adopted at 5 in Russia and yes I did have behavioral issues, living in Russia for 5 years I became integrated with the society and what they viewed was totally different and the values that Americans have I have never been to the United States. Most kids in the US that are 5 at this time know what’s right from wrong. Moved into United States little couple weeks to know the difference between right and wrong. For most kids have five years under their belt, while I had to learn from scratch, what behavior were proper and accepted.

And I had people around me to help me understand, but after that’s stage of the behavior problems which only lasts for a Week for a couple months the child is fully integrated into society start acting like a normal six or seven-year-old boy. It’s Interesting to research a topic that is about me, and every other adoptive Child out there. It gives me clarification on what adoption really is, gives life to people who don’t have it

And it could be anyone old, or new, or young, adoptive person out there that one day their life changed forever, they got a new beginning. Yes, there are arguments out there that adoption is bad, there are some topics that we didn’t covered like religion and other criteria but the main focus is on the cost, and issues that have to do with legal and ethical problems with the adoption.

This may not be the most interesting topic you can research out there, but it’s fascinating to see how the adaption process really works and if it’s really that bad it’s really not bad at all. Ethics play a big part in the adoption process ‘Adoption is an emotional, social, And legal process to which children who will not be raised by the birthmothers become full, permanent, and legal members of another family, because of this adoption involves the rights of three distinct members: the birth parents, the child that’s going to the process of the adoption,'(Jenaus, Pg. 5) And the adoptive parents. Adoption lasts forever, many of the children changed over time when adults they may choose to claim their right to know they’re genetic and historical identity. The adoption agency and other programs need to act ethically to ensure that every party understands all of the points being laid out. Adoption is not just when your child, it goes all the way through your adult Hood.

There are also many beliefs that adoption has problems with ethics due to the parent ivy returning the child back to its place of origin, due to behavioral problems and/or other issues that arise when dealing with the child, most people don’t have an incident to why should the child back to whether I can think just because they have a behavioral issue. I find this troubling because Child had a way out, button return small detail that the parents didn’t like. I don’t think we should judge people and also I don’t think people should judge other people for deciding the fate of a child, Everyone is entitled to their own opinions but when it comes to adoption on one thing is very clear that children adoptive or not should have a home that they can live in grow up and be separated from that ethical problem of adoption. I agree that Adoption can benefit if I understood correctly and not judge upon due to minor fluctuations.

In conclusion, adoption greatly beneficial to the public and to the world. It helps kids get off the street, and also helps could stay out of foster homes, and also brings happiness to new families and new couples can’t have a baby or just choose not to but wasn’t one. Is a controversial topic my phone a lot of people are for just as many against, but we need to have people out there to tell their story to research this so forth called adoption, to let people know where they stand on this topic. All children should get a second chance at life if available. Sofa check out down about adoption and look at the bigger picture children pave the roads for the future and if we can give them a helping hand that could mean a stone or a heart.

Works Cited

  1. “Adoption Reunions: Real Life Stories.” Adopted.com – Where People Come to Reunite Instantly!, www.adopted.com/reunions.html&tid=38FMi3120M2hgZM3O860880B32400ARJ.
  2. “5 Reasons You Won’t Adopt from Foster Care, and Why They’re Wrong.” Dave Thomas Foundation for Adoption, 2 Aug. 2018, www.davethomasfoundation.org/5-reasons-you-wont-adopt-from-foster-care-and-why-theyre-wrong/.
  3. https://www.davethomasfoundation.org/5-reasons-you-wont-adopt-from-foster-care-and-whytheyre-wrong/
  4. http://ellieswonder.blogspot.com/2013/01 /adoption-vs-having-your-own-childand-we .html
  5. http://budgeting.thenest.com/average-price-hospital-bills-pregnancy-24229.html
  6. http://pages.uoregon.edu/adoption/topics/adoptionstatistics.htm
  7. http://www.myinterestingfacts.com/adoption-facts/

Second Language Acquisition In Adopted Child

In recent years, adopting a child is becoming a widespread situation. However, sometimes couples do not adopt kids from their own country; they adopt kids from other countries. This situation can be confusing for older children since everything changes for them such as culture, society, social environment, and the most important one; language. Children are exposed to a new language, and probably their native language will eventually be forgotten. For instance, a six-year-old Turkish child was adopted by a Canadian family whose name is Ayça has moved to Canada. She will learn other languages such as English, French. At first thanks to her brain plasticity, she will probably learn other languages easily. She will be exposed to the language in her daily life, at school, at home and interact with native speakers. That’s why she probably will have native-like pronunciation. However, in this period her Turkish development ceases and as time progresses she will forget it. Adopting a child who is in his/her early ages from a different country might be difficult for a child’s development but, on the other hand, his/her adaptation to the second language will be much easier than the adult learners’. It makes a child bilingual or multilingual because he/she already has a mother tongue. To understand a child’s L2 development we can consult Nativist, Cognitivist and Socialist views. What will happen in the initial, intermediate and final state according to these views? What will happen to his/her mother tongue?

According to Nativists and Noam Chomsky, we have an innate capacity for language learning. We are born with an ability to learn a language. We can understand some specific rules in language and this set of rules named as Universal Grammar. The places we born such as; villages or big cities, and the languages that we speak are not important. All children encounter the same language learning order. However, there is a critical period. According to the Critical Period Hypothesis, we have a device in our brain named as LAD “Language Acquisition Device.” We have to use it up to puberty; otherwise, it loses its function and language acquisition becomes impossible. For example, Genie was a thirteen-year-old girl was raised isolated from society, and nobody communicated with her. Her family had kept her in a room for thirteen years, and they did not talk to her. After she had got rescued scientist tried to rehabilitate her. She learned some basic vocabulary and syntax structures, but she could not learn correct grammar structure. Ayça is a six-year-old, and she has brain plasticity. She is monolingual, but after moving to Canada, she will learn other languages. Her L2 acquisition follows her L1 acquisition. In the initial state, she has underlying knowledge and innate capacity. In the intermediate state, according to Contrastive Analysis, there is a habit formation, Stimulus- Respond-Reinforcement, and transfer. She will transfer her L1 to L2, but the transfer can be negative or positive. In positive transfer, she correctly uses L1 structures in L2, but in negative transfer, L1 interferes with her use of structures that will be inappropriate. Her learning will progress with feedbacks. In this process her aptitude and motivation is also important factors for her L2 development. Finally, in the final state, she will have multilingual competence. In order to work through her L2 acquisition we have to look at different levels of acquisition. Firstly, she will learn lexicon, the meaning of words, pronunciation and word combinations. Her phonology will develop simultaneously with her lexicon. She will learn intonation patterns, syllable structure and speech sounds. For morphology, according to Morpheme Order Studies, there is general order for acquisition, and she acquires L2 word structure subconsciously. After that, her grammar development will occur as mentioned before that there is the Universal Grammar. UG is a set of principles that contain parameters. However, while learning grammar structure, there will be the poverty of stimulus; in other words, lack of input since hearing all grammatical structures is impossible. However, Ayça’s brain will still be able to produce correct sentences. Nativists named this situation as a logical problem of language learning. Children’s knowledge goes beyond of their input and in this process they use their inter-language device. By the help of all information in her brain, she will try to create correct sentences. Firstly, she will start with word by word, and then she will rarely use morphemes. Finally, she will create correct grammatical sentences. She receives positive and negative evidence in this process. As for her Turkish, in this process, she will learn new culture, new languages and she will not use Turkish for communication. That’s why she will eventually forget it. Linguists say that in early ages, while L2 development is increasing, L1 competence decreases in the first three years in a different country (Rumbaut, 1998). Also according to other research, since their new families do not support their L1, and usually children are not using it in their new social environment, young international adopted children loses their L1 capabilities and they have only spoken L2(Gindis, 1991). I think because of Ayça’s age, she will easily adapt to her new environment, Canadian culture, and new languages. She is in a critical period, and she is going to acquire the language from native speakers; that’s why she will be a native speaker. In the initial state, she already has L1 knowledge; she can transfer it to L2. Because of her innate capacity and with the help of Universal Grammar she will learn lexicon and grammar structures easily. In the intermediate state, she takes input from her new parent and peers that she stores in her inter-language device, and she will use them. In the final state, she will be multilingual. In this process her Turkish competence decreases gradually. According to Nicholadis and Grabois, when the exposure of language stops, acquisition will cease (2002).

Ideas that are located in our brain might be specialized for language learning. Our language learning mostly occurs in left hemisphere, because of the core in our left lobe, however; it is not localized in a specific area. On the contrary, our right hemisphere more dominant in second language acquisition and all this learning process is the cognitive process. According to Cognitivists, L2 acquisition is an automatic process, such as; learning math or riding a bicycle. Cognivists symbolise our brain to a computer. Cognitivists say that acquisition and learning are not distinct mental processes, they are the same processes of perception, memory, and generalization and contrary to Nativist, they assume that there is no specific device like “Language Acquisition Device.” Ayça will learn L2 like any other knowledge system, and rather than innate capacity, her social environment is effective on her language learning. Her L2 emerges from her interaction with the environment. According to Ellis, a functionalist, usage-based model of language is the most suitable analysis (1997). This approach clearly states that in learning, as in theoretical analysis, language and its function must not be separated from each other. Language and semantics are snafus; that’s why we need functional, naturalistic, communicative situations for learning. Language learning requires effort like another complex. The cognitive approach based on IP “Information Processing” that deals with the mental process including language learning and use. L2 learning is the acquisition of complex cognitive skills. They claim that language is a hierarchical set of skills and Ayça’s second language develops with practice and repetition. Like Morpheme Order Studies Cognitive approach has the Multidimensional Model. According to this model, Ayça acquired certain grammatical structure in an advancing sequence. Firstly, she will learn words, but they are not related to rules. After that, she will learn lexical items, such as; the numbers and gender of nouns, and then she will begin to categorize them. Finally, she will produce grammatical sentences. Also, Ayça’s linguistic performance includes “mapping” between form and function. Forms are lexical items, and their functions are grammatical. For example, the word bee whose phonetic form is /bi:/, the function is the meaning of black and yellow flying insect. In the sentence “Bees are flying” when we look word order “bees” before and “flying” after auxiliary form. The inflection ‘-s’ also form and its function is to demonstrate that there is more than one bee.

In Connectionist perspective, the learning process takes place in our brain. As Ayça is exposed to the repetition of input, her L2 will develop. According to Harrington, characterizing learning in local domains of processing, such as; phonological, lexical and morphological level, Connectionist approach is highly successful. As for her Turkish competence, according to Niemeier, children are using the first acquired forms with easy structures both of the languages and it last until they reach more complex structures (1990). That’s why Ayça will use code-switches. She combined her mother tongue “Turkish” and new languages at first. Then, when she learns more complex structures in her new languages, she ceases the use of Turkish, and she forgets it. I think Cognitive view is inadequate to explain some situations, such as; the logical problem of language learning. They claim that our language emerges from interactions with the environment, communication with people, but as it is mentioned earlier, it is almost impossible that hear all grammatical sentence structures just by listening or speaking. For instance, in Inuit Society who live in the Arctic that does not interact with their children until children speak on their own when they grow up. Although this communication is lacking interaction, children learn a language and speak on their own. That’s why I agree with the Nativist Approach; it is possible because of our innate faculty. We have an innate capacity to learn a language, and we do not need intense communication for language learning.

According to the Socialist view, our knowledge system including the language occurs with social interactions. As a result of the social interactions, we share our thoughts and communicate with a language community in which people share the common language. In this situation, Ayça is a member of different language community because she is multilingual. In this chapter, we will look at how she acquired her L2 by interacting with other people. According to Lantolf and Thorne, our neurobiology is a critical element for higher order thinking, the most critical forms of our activities developed with social interactions (2006). To state in other words, communication with other people is a necessary condition in the development of thinking. That’s why Ayça needs active social interactions with her parents and peers. She must learn new culture and other aspects of her new languages, and it happens with relations. She must be a part of her new communities. Park states that Social Theory gives us a chance to focus on understanding language that is used in context, linguistic and attitudinal changes and their processes, also cultural understandings that happen in the processes of L2 learning (2005). In social interactions, Ayça will use her gestures, mimics and languages itself to understand native speakers and to explain her own emotions, ideas and experiences. However, sociolinguistics claim that there were varieties such as learners itself, different speakers of a language, and Ayça’s development processes may be different from other children. In the initial state, she needs comprehensible input and interaction. Both inputs’ quality and quantity are important. In intermediate state, at first, Ayça will use foreign language communication in her speech. Her parents help her with interactional modifications and make direct or indirect corrections. It is essential because with the help of this correction and feedbacks she can require the native competence. Direct correction may be negative feedback for Ayça, because correcting directly can be firm for her age and this affects her learning process.

However in indirect correction, as it is stated before with the help of interactional modifications, her parents can support her L2 development. Repetition, paraphrase expansion, and elaboration can give examples of indirect feedbacks. With the help of these interactions, she develops her L2. In the final state, she becomes multilingual. Another view in the Social context is Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. According to this theory, social interactions are not only ease to learning but also force acquisition. These are interpersonal interactions that happen between people. For example, interactions between Ayça and her parents happen in Zone of Proximal Development. Her parents help her development in L2 through scaffolding. Not only her parents but also her peers help her, but it will not occur without Ayça’s active participation. According to Lightbown and Spada, if she/he takes the correct input from an adult or a peer, a child may be able to complete more cognitively demanding tasks (2006). Zone of Proximal Development is seen as a symbolic area where a learner and conversational partner ¬build knowledge, construction of knowledge among learners in interaction with partners or in private speech. Also in Ayça’s intrapersonal interactions, in another words; her inner speech, communication happens in her mind helps to delevop her L2. I think because of micro and macro social factors, Ayça has difficulty in learning L2. However, the support of her social environment she can deal with these struggles. As for Socialist view actually, it is logical, but in my opinion, it can be supporting view because it defends the importance of social interaction with people, but we can learn a language from other authentic resources on our own.

To sum up, this paper examines different approaches to same case. Among through Nativist, Cognitivist and Socialist approaches I think the most logical one is Chomsky’s Nativist Approach. Nativists say that humans born with the innate capacity I agree with that we can learn a language. Ayça already has a Turkish competence when she adopted, and she was in the critical age to language learning. She has brain plasticity to language learning. She can make a positive transfer from her L1 to L2. She will learn the language from Native speaker; that’s why she has native-like pronunciation. In the initial state, she has an L1 and innate capacity for L2 learning. She has cognitive development and real-world knowledge. In the intermediate state there will be a negative or positive transfer she will take input and store them in her inter-language she will take feedback and instructions. In the final state, she developed native linguistic competence.

What Is The Role Of Adoption Of Parents In Society?

Adoption is not just the call to have a seamless glowing family. Rather, it is a call to share and give love, kindness, and patience…! The adoption triangle comprises of the kids who are adopted, birth mothers/fathers, and the adoptive parents. Regardless of whether these three groups never get together, their lives are bound to each other through selection. Children are associated with the two arrangements of guardians, and the birth parents and adoptive parents are associated with one another through the kids.

There are delights and distresses for everybody joined to the adoption. Birth parents may miss the kid they created, however, may likewise be helped that the kid is by and large all around thought about and loved in her new home. Adoptive parents might be worried that the children will feel the loss of their organic guardians yet might be glad to love, care and bring up the child. The kids may ponder about their organic guardians yet may treasure and cherish the new parents.

These thoughts and sentiments are muddled, intricate and long-lasting, and are managed all the more effectively by certain individuals while others may battle with them. Every adoption is special as is the acclimation to it. But with love, kindness, and support, most adoptions are effective at making relishing and stable situations in which children bloom.

Adoption Agencies that Pay Birth Mothers

If you are genuinely thinking about adoption for your infant, you will never need to stress over the costs that accompany it. Adoption is, and consistently will be, allowed to imminent birth mothers. There are a few things you should think about the truth of adoption agencies that ‘pay’ the pregnant mother and the various ways that adoption agencies bolster birth moms financially.

At the point when individuals consider adoption agencies, they frequently accept that some will pay you for setting your child for the adoption. But this isn’t the situation. Regardless of where you live, you won’t discover any selection offices that pay to adopt your infant. In each state, it is unlawful to get installment in return for putting a child for adoption.

But even though there aren’t adoption organizations that pay the birth mother for her infant, there are still Adoption Agencies that will give cash to birth parents for adoption period. These are reliable agencies.

How to Find Adoptive Parents for My Baby?

If you have settled on adoption for you and your kids, your first question will most likely be: who will adopt my infant? Luckily, numerous adoptive parents are hoping to adopt your child, and with the correct assistance, you can locate the ideal parents. Here, you can discover all the data you need on the most proficient method to discover adoptive parents through an adoptive agency.

Find Adoptive Parents with the Help of an Agency!

Numerous ladies who consider adoption have no clue where to discover couples who need to adopt a child. If this depicts you, at that point, we have a lot of choices to support you, including proficient adoption offices. An adoption agency is a thorough adoption specialist co-op that works with both adoptive families and potential birth mothers for the completion of the adoption. If you work with an adoptive agency, you can anticipate the accompanying advantages as you continued looking for the correct family:

Direction and Counseling

Adoption experts are prepared and experienced in helping ladies simply like you. Your authority will probably walk you through the whole procedure and give input if you need it.

Pre-Screened Families

The majority of the families that work with an adoption organization have been screened by that office and finished a home report, which implies that they have been esteemed as fit to bring up a child.

Assenting Family Profiles

When you choose to work with an agency, your adoptive master will indicate you print or video profiles that will enable you to become more acquainted with the families holding on to adopt.

Help with Contacting a Family

When you have chosen a family, your adoption expert will be there to direct you through the principal phases of becoming more acquainted with them. If you need your adoption to be increasingly shut, your expert can likewise help exchange info among you and the family.

Adoption agencies can be exceptionally helpful and invaluable for birth mothers, yet this does not imply that each lady works with an organization. In some cases, a pregnant mother may seek after what is called an autonomous adoption.

Eager ladies who are encountering a spontaneous pregnancy oftentimes think about adoption as an alternative. Numerous ladies who become pregnant and were not intending to get pregnant are frequently stunned, befuddled, frightened and stressed. Having an adoption guide to help them as they talk through their circumstance can be exceptionally useful to calm their stress, questions, and strain.

An adoption agency is there to tune in to requirements, concerns, and questions. Ladies who have gotten alternatives advising concerning their unforeseen pregnancy frequently share that it was so useful to have somebody accessible to simply hear them out, not condemn and to offer every single imaginable answer for them to consider as they settle on their choice for their child. There is a great help for birth mothers looking for adoptive parents.

Similarities And Differences Of Independent And An Agency Adoption

In my research I discovered that in Fairfax County Virginia, “the Probate Court operates independently and handles the following: wills for safekeeping, probates wills, grants administration for decedent’s estates (testate and intestate) and testamentary trusts, and qualifies guardians and/or conservators over incapacitated adults and guardians over the person and property of minors. Appointments to probate an estate or qualify as a fiduciary are required.” (Government, 2020). However, the Domestic and Juvenile Courts are linked together and handled by the Circuit Court of Fairfax County, Virginia and concerned with all aspects of adoption. The following services are described by John Frey, “The primary sections of The Code of Virginia are found at §63.2-1200 –63.2-1253, but please note there are other requirements throughout the Virginia Code that may apply. The Adoption chapter of the Virginia Code is set forth with an article providing general provisions applicable in all types of adoption and the specific provisions applicable to specific types of placements.” (Frey, 2019).

To understand the difference between independent and an agency adoption it is important to define both and their similarities and differences. Independent or (private) adoption is defined in our text as, “The biological parents transfer custody of the child directly to the adoptive parent or parents. It is handled by a third party person who could be a clergy, physician or an attorney rather than a licensed state agency.” (Wilson, 2016, p. 272). This process seems more personal as the biological parent or parents have a say and can choose who they want their child to be and live with. In an interesting article written by: American Adoptions gives the following reasons for this being a positive experience. Here are some points on this subject:

  • “In an independent adoption, you get to know your child’s adoptive parents. This means that you’ll trade identifying information, such as last names, email addresses, and possibly phone numbers.
  • Independent adoptions in Virginia allow you to develop a relationship with these people to ensure that you’ve chosen the perfect fit for your baby in private adoption, and adopted children get to know their birth parents. Depending on the methods of contact agreed upon between the birth parents and the adoptive parents, adopted kids get to communicate with their birth parents and ask any questions they may have. They’ll never wonder why you chose adoption, nor will they feel as if you “gave them up,” because you’ll have the opportunity to explain otherwise. Not only will this be extremely important to them as they form their self-identities, but they’ll have the chance to interact with two sets of parents who love them.” (Adoptions, 2020). Our text defines agency adoptions as, “an adoption facilitated by an agency and licensed by the state.” (Wilson, 2016, p. 270). In Virginia, “the state code § 63.2-1221- Placement of children for adoption by agency or local board.” (Law, § 63.2-1221. State of Virginia, 2020). For agency adoption as written, “All adoption agencies in Virginia are licensed centers that facilitate placements between hopeful parents and women considering this unplanned pregnancy option. They offer important legal services that make the entire process — including home studies and connection to legal representation — a success. No matter what Virginia adoption agency you choose, you should always work with one that prioritizes your needs and offers quality services, too.” (Agencies, 2020). An explanation in our text states the following, “Children come into the custody of agency through two primary routes: the parent(s) surrender custody of the the child through a written relinquishing of their parental rights to the agency or a court terminates the parental rights for cause, based on clear and convincing evidence that they are unfit parent(s).” (Wilson, 2016, p. 270).

As for agency there are three types as follows:

  1. First, private adoption agencies: the biological mother or father places their child with a perspective family that wants to adopt. In my state of Virginia there are several organizations that handle private adoption.
  2. Second, would be foster care adoption: where children who are in our foster programs and have the chance to be able to have a forever home by being adopted by a loving individual or couple. In my state of Virginia, the state code for this is, “Code of Virginia-§ 63.2-1229. Foster parent adoption.” (Law, 2020). Third is international adoption agency: a child in one country is adopted by a resident in another country. In my state of Virginia this is the information of the state code, “§ 63.2-1200.1. Recognition of foreign adoption; issuance of birth certificates. Any adoption of a child who was born in a foreign country and who was not a citizen of the United States at the time of birth shall, subject to the provisions of subsection D of § 63.2-1201.1, be recognized by the Commonwealth and the rights and obligations of the parties shall be determined as though the order of adoption was entered by a court of the Commonwealth if the adoption was finalized pursuant to the laws of the country from which the child was adopted, and the child was admitted to the United States with an IR-3 or IH-3 visa issued by the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services.” (Law, Code § 63.2-1200.1. State of Virginai, 2020). ” The major difference between closed and open adoptions is that a closed adoption is where the parent (s) adopting will have no information about the child’s biological parents. An f open adoption provides both the biological and adoptive parent(s) to get to know each other. It seems to me that an open adoption would be in the best interest of the child and everyone else involved. On a personal note regarding a closed adoption my mother who was adopted from in orphanage in the state of Virginia. My mother spent her whole life wondering and trying to find out who her biological mother was. She has since passed and never got to know the women that gave birth to her.

A good definition is by consideringadoption.com, “foster care adoption is the adoption of a child in foster care whose biological parents’ rights have been terminated by a court.” The child may be adopted by either his or her foster parents or another adoptive family. Families who want to pursue a straight adoption from foster care don’t always have to become foster parents first; however, there are some states that list becoming an approved foster parent first as one of their eligibility requirements. Families who become foster parents and then later end up adopting are also pursuing a form of foster parent adoption called foster-to-adopt.” (Adoption, 2020).

The rights of the biological parents as written in our text, fall into one of three primary categories, “The legal mother, married father and non-marital biological father. As for the legal mother her rights are established at the birth of her child. As such she has the right to choose to put the child up for adoption. The rights of the married father is when the the biological mother is married, under marital presumption her husband is commonly deemed to be the father of any child born during their marriage or within 300 days of its termination. The non-marital biological father is the father of an illegitimate child and are unable to establish their legal status as parents.” (Wilson, 2016, pp. 224,340). This was very interesting in regards to the tort of parental interference. In researching on line Gail Burns has written the following: “Although the General Assembly has abolished the cause of action for alienation of affections, Va. Code Ann. § 8.01-220, the Wyatt Court distinguished the two torts: ‘Tortious interference with parental or custodial relationship’ intimates that the complaining parent has been deprived of his/her parental or custodial rights; in other words, but for the tortious interference, the complaining parent would be able to exercise some measure of control over his/her child’s care, rearing, safety, well being, etc. By contrast, ‘alienation of affections’ connotes only that the parent is not able to enjoy the company of his/her child; this cause of action does not suggest that the offending party has removed parental or custodial authority from the complaining parent. ___ Va. at ___, 725 S.E.2d at 562 (internal quotation marks omitted). The court concluded that a cause of action for tortious interference with parental rights is consistent with existing common law, and set forth its elements as follows: (1) the complaining parent has a right to establish or maintain a parental or custodial relationship with his/her minor child; (2) a party outside of the relationship between the complaining parent and his/her child intentionally interfered with the complaining parent’s parental or custodial relationship with his/her child by removing or detaining the child from returning to the complaining parent, without that parent’s consent, or by otherwise preventing the complaining parent from exercising his/her parental or custodial rights.” (Gale Burns on Wed, 2012).

In understanding the Putative Father Registry, it is important to first give a definition of what is a Putative Father. The answer given by our text is the following:” A man who may be the father of the child but at the time of birth of the child was not married to the mother. Their paternity has not yet been established through the legal process”. (Wilson, 2016, p. 224).

In the state of Virginia, the definition of Putative Father is: “the alleged father of a child”. (Virginia, 2014). “The State code in Virginia is 22VAC40-201-190 and definition for Putative Father Registry is a confidential database of registered putative fathers. In Virginia the purpose of Putative Father Registry” is to protect the rights of a putative father by allowing him to be notified of termination of his parental rights and/or adoption proceedings regarding a child that he may have fathered.8.2 Legal Citations The Code of Virginia, Chapter 12, Article 7, §§ 63.2-1249 through 63.2-1253 provides guidance on the Virginia Putative Father Registry.” (Virginia, 2014). “Any Putative Father is required to register if he would like to receive notice of an adoption proceeding or termination of parental rights for a child he may have fathered. To register, complete the registration form and mail to the following address: Virginia Department of Social Services 801 East Main Street Richmond, VA 23219.” (Virginia, 2014).

In closing, this assignment has really helped me understand a snippet of what is involved in adoption. I have learned that as our story example that was given at the start of this assignment there are so many pieces and aspects of adoption and it can be very complicated. It also involves a variety of professionals as well as parents. As for the biological parents this is a very hard decision and position, they are put in and requires them to get as much information as possible in the process of adoption.

Citations

  1. John T. Frey, Circuit Court in Fairfax County. (2020). Probate Forms. 4110 Chain Bridge Road Fairfax, VA 22030.
  2. American Adoptions. (2020). 5 Benefits of Open Adoption. ©2020 American Adoptions All Rights Reserved. National Office, 7500 W 110th St. Suite 500 Overland Park, KS 66210.
  3. Contact American Adoptions Legal Disclaimer Privacy Policy Areas Served.
  4. Commonwealth of Virginia. (© Copyright, 2020). Code of Virginia, § 63.2-1229. Foster parent adoption. All rights reserved. Site developed by the Division of Legislative Automated Systems (DLAS).
  5. Considering Adoption. (2020). What Is Foster Care Adoption. American Adoptions. America’s Adoption Agency. https://consideringadoption.com/privacy-policy,
  6. Gail Burns. (July 2012). TORTS: Tortious Interference with Parental Rights. © 2016 National Legal Research Group, Inc.
  7. Virginia Putative Father Registry. (2014). About the P putative Father Registry.
  8. LIS Virginia Law. (2020). Code of Virginia§ 63.2-1221. Placement of children for adoption by agency or local board. © Copyright Commonwealth of Virginia, 2020. All rights reserved. Site developed by the Division of Legislative Automated Systems (DLAS).

Australian Federalism and Its Role in Adoption and Family Support

‘Adoption’ means the act or method of adopting a ‘child adoption’ person implies the legal act or idea of making the child of another person member of your family, such that he or she is one of your own children. Family members want their children to get the best, to support their development and growth. Family support for families with children allows families navigate a wide variety of resources and programs, including structured assistance (such as paid respite care) and voluntary help (such as parent-to-parent connections) and a neighborhood service network that facilitates the well-being of special needs families and their kids.

In this report we cover the effect of federal system, alternative approaches to the federal system on adoption and family support, separation of governmental power, the voting system and the Australian constitution on adoption and family support. It investigates the role of the central and the state government and the effects of gambling in Australia on the same.

Federalism and Adoption Versus Family Support

Federalism, strategy for political affiliation that joins separate states or various countries inside a general political system in a way that allows each to keep up its own decency. Government systems do this by requiring that basic courses of action be made and completed through trade in some structure, so all the people can participate in choosing and executing decisions. The political principles that breathe life into government structures underline the matchless quality of wheeling and dealing and organized coordination among a couple of power territories; they stress the balance of dissipated power puts as a technique for protecting individual and close by opportunities. Federalism is a game plan of government wherein power is isolated and shared between two components (Dudaeva, 2020). Federalism is the degree of impact among state and national governments. Under a national government, in Australia the allotment and family support laws are generally pondered endeavors of the state. The power is diffused among different altogether self-proceeding centers. Such a spread of power may be named non-centralization. Another segment of any administration structure is what has been gotten the United States provincial vote-based framework. This has two faces: the use of areal divisions to ensure absence of inclination and correspondence in the depiction of the various get-togethers and interests in the nation and the use of such divisions to ensure about close by self-administration and depiction for grouped get-togethers inside the proportionate normal society. Local absence of predisposition has exhibited outstandingly accommodating in social requests that are changing, thinking about the depiction of new interests according to their quality basically by allowing their supporters to cast a voting form in commonly proportionate territorial units. At the same time, the comfort of different social occasions whose differentiations are essential instead of transient by giving them local power bases of their own has improved the limit of government systems to function as vehicles of political joining (Fopp, 1979).

Alternative Approach to Federalism and Adoption Versus Family Support

Certain alternative systems to the federal system can be, the unitary system and the confederal system. A unitary system is a political structure where the central government holds most or the aggregate of the regulating power. A unitary game plan of government, or unitary state, is a sovereign state controlled as a lone component. The central government is exceptional, and the administrative divisions practice just powers that the central government has assigned to them. Subdivisional units are made and annulled, and their powers may be broadened and constrained by the central government (Harris, 2005). The United Kingdom, for example, is a unitary state, as its constituent countries — England, Scotland, Wales, and Northern Ireland — have no ability to challenge the legality of exhibits of Parliament. Unitary states stand apart from managerial states, for instance, the United States, wherein power is shared between the administration and the states. More than 150 countries are unitary states, including France, China, and Japan. In such a course of action of organization, rather than the administration structure, gathering laws and systems and family support laws will be united. The central government would be the position worried about regard to youngster care circumstances, laws and setting of rules and strategies with respect to gathering (Harris, 2005).

Separation of Power and Adoption Versus Family Support

The Australian Constitution is the arrangement of rules by which Australia is run. The initial 3 parts of the Constitution characterize 3 for the most part separate gatherings—the Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary—and the jobs they play in the administering of Australia. The ability to make and oversee Australian law is separated between these 3 gatherings. This division depends on the rule of the ‘detachment of forces’. Under this standard, the ability to oversee ought to be dispersed between the Parliament, the Executive and the Judiciary to keep away from any gathering having all the force. Each gathering should work inside characterized zones of duty to keep a mind the activities of the others (Young, 2007).

The rules are made and modified by the Parliament. The Parliament is composed of 50 chosen individuals (this number can change). Parliament (also referred to as the Legislature) consists of the President, the Senate and the House of Representatives. The Government actively puts laws The Government consists of the King, the Prime Minister and the Ministers. The President is the Head of government and has the official power to act exclusively on the advice of the Cabinet or a Minister, or any other institution or authority approved by the Constitution. The Court rules on the law (Smith, 2014). The Judiciary consists of Australia’s Supreme Court and other federal tribunals. This means that the Council or Parliament endorses and adopts legislation with respect to the program. The official ensures that these laws are executed and the courts, for example, the family courts handle and encroachment of the laws and guideline and passes decisions. The Australian constitution divides responsibilities between the States and the Commonwealth surrounding a few regions of Australian family law. The double framework made as an outcome, especially comparable to youngster assurance issues, gives chances to disarray and duplication.

Voting System and Adoption Versus Family Support

Australia is a delegate majority rule government, which implies Australians vote to choose individuals from parliament for settle on laws and choices for their sake. It is obligatory for Australian residents 18 years and over to select to cast a ballot. It is likewise obligatory to go to a democratic spot in political race day or to cast a ballot via mail. At government races, Australians pick individuals from parliament to speak to their perspectives and interests in the Senate and the House of Representatives. Thusly, the Australian Parliament serves Australians and is responsible to them. This implies in a family where there are youngsters in child care or are received, the kids once they arrive at the democratic age may cast their votes. The way of life and worth framework in the individual’s supportive or non-permanent family impacts who they will decide in favor of. Casting a ballot chooses the constitution of the parliament or the governing body. The assembly is the thing that chooses which laws and bills are to be passed consequently as referenced over, the democratic framework and in this way has an impact over the selection and family bolster laws and guidelines.

The Constitution and Adoption Versus Family Support

The Australian constitution in Section 51 restricts the intervention of the State in family law by expressly enabling it to make legislation “with regard to marriage, and divorce and marriage causes and in relation to parental rights and child custody and care”. As an outcome, public law conflicts (those in which the state is a party), and particularly protection of children, juvenile justice and adoption Is exempt from control of the Commonwealth. The resolution of financial disputes between unmarried spouses and (until a decade ago) their children are also beyond the scope of Commonwealth jurisdiction (The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1993).

Child Benefit Appraisal Act, or allowing a minor to marry under the Marriage Act. It can also render orders pertaining to child protection under section 67ZC of the Family Law Act. This vague and amorphous parens patriae authority has its origins in the duty of the Crown to protect infants, which was historically the jurisdiction of the English Chancery courts. It has been most often practiced by the Family Court in relation to medical operations affecting children, particularly notably when authorization to sterilize young people with intellectual disabilities is required. It presumably does not apply to ex nuptial children, however, because the authority is not drawn from the force of marriage, and this continues to be verified. State courts also have parens patriae jurisdiction which is presumably superseded by Family Court orders (Harris, 2005).

State and the Central Government and Their Roles in Adoption Versus Family Support

In straightforward terms, the states and domains are answerable for all the individual advances related with your application, while the Australian Government has an oversight job to guarantee Australia is having its influence in moral and fitting inter-country reception courses of action. State and region focal specialists are answerable for overseeing selection application, and for evaluating your qualification and reasonableness to embrace. This evaluation is made in accordance with the applicable state or domain appropriation enactment. Obligations of the states and regions incorporate, getting ready families for, and supporting them through, the between nation reception process, evaluating selection applications, dealing with everyday issues identifying with appropriation applications, giving exhortation and help to families in regards to explicit abroad nation prerequisites, checking progress of individual applications with the pertinent office in the abroad nation, offering help and supervision to families after the arrangement of received kids (The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia, 1993). The Australian Government has various obligations regarding overseeing and managing between nation reception in Australia. These incorporate, guaranteeing Australia meets every one of its commitments under the Hague Convention on inter-nation adoption, giving national strategy initiative and coordination, to guarantee best practices in between nation reception, overseeing and auditing existing abroad appropriation game plans, through structure solid associations with abroad nations, building up new abroad selection courses of action with nations who show consistence with the Hague Convention and are a feasible program for Australia to enter a game plan with.

Gambling Problem in Australia and Adoption and Family Support

Australians are the world’s most productive card sharks, in light of per capita spending. In 2016, Australians lost more cash per individual – a normal of US $990 – than some other created nation, as indicated by inquire about by consultancy H2 Gambling Capital. In examination, second place All out betting use in Australia expanded by 7.7% from $21.114 billion of every 2013-14 to $22.734 billion out of 2014-15, as indicated by the most recent version of the Australian Gambling Statistics, distributed a year ago. In the interim, per grown-up betting use expanded from $1,171.09 to $1,241.86. The most common types of betting are lottery-type games (for example, Powerball or Oz Lotto), with 30% detailed use, however poker machines come next, with 8% of grown-ups revealing they use pokies in an ordinary month, as per the 2017 Household, Income and Labor Dynamics in Australia Survey (Mcmullan & Perrier, 2007).

Kids who have been embraced or taken into child care, can be affected in various ways like, if a grown-up near them is betting to assuage pressure or weariness, it can demonstrate to the youngster that betting is an approach to manage issues for example you have to win cash to cover tabs. Later on, the youngster may do something very similar, as opposed to confronting the issue head on. There is a solid connection among betting and family brutality, with around 33% of individuals with betting issues detailing being casualties or culprits of family savagery (Young, 2007). Unmanaged betting can go connected at the hip with budgetary pressure, and kids can feel the effect of this. This might be expected to there being less cash for no particular reason things and at times, even necessities. Experiencing childhood in a situation where there is money related flimsiness can likewise affect a youngster’s conviction that all is good and strength.

Conclusion

In conclusion, we can say that we have conducted a detailed assessment of the federal system of Australia, the separation of governmental power, the constitution and the state and the central government and their effects and the important role to play in adoption and family support. The voting system and its impact on the adoption family support laws. Gambling, which is regarded as a major problem in Australia, and its effects on adoption and family support.

References

  1. Australian Govt. Pub. Service. (1993). The Constitution of the Commonwealth of Australia.
  2. Champagne, R. (2005). Federalism. LRB.
  3. Dudaeva, M. (2020). Belgian Federalism: Threats to Integrity. Federalism, (1), 186-197. https://doi.org/10.21686/2073-1051-2020-1-186-197
  4. Fopp, P. (1979). Australia: Inter-Country Adoption. Adoption & Fostering, 97(3), 48-52. https://doi.org/10.1177/030857597909700316
  5. Harris, P. (2005). ‘Family is Family … It Does Affect Everybody in the Family‘: Black Birth Relatives and Adoption Support. Adoption & Fostering, 29(2), 66-75. https://doi.org/10.1177/030857590502900208
  6. Logan, J. (1999). Adoption and Direct Post-Adoption Contact. Adoption & Fostering, 23(4), 58-59. https://doi.org/10.1177/030857599902300411
  7. Mcmullan, J., & Perrier, D. (2007). The Security of Gambling and Gambling with Security: A Rejoinder. International Gambling Studies, 7(3), 377-382. https://doi.org/10.1080/14459790701627120
  8. Smith, J. (2014). Federalism. UBC Press.
  9. Sourdin, T., Brown, T., & Batagol, B. (2012). Family Support Program Literature Review, Research into the Family Support Program: Family Law Services. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2707380
  10. Thompson, R., & Pulsford, D. (2012). Dementia – Support for Family and Friends. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.
  11. Wardle, H. (2019). The Same or Different? Convergence of Skin Gambling and Other Gambling Among Children. Journal Of Gambling Studies, 35(4), 1109-1125. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10899-019-09840-5
  12. Young, E. (2007). The Constitution Outside the Constitution. SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.965865

Foster Care Vs Orphanage: Critical Essay

“An Experiment in Zero Parenting” by Eliot Marshall ia an article that discusses an experiment done by the Bucharest Early Intervention Project (BEIP) in Romania. In the 1960’s the dictator felt Romania’s population needed to be boosted, so he started taxing women for having less than five children with no consideration about their financial and physical abilities to care for any or all of the children. This left a heavy burden on Romania to take care of these children when their caregivers no longer could, and these children were put into orphanages. These orphanages were not a positive environment for the children to be raised in. They were overrun with nearly 170,000 children living in them, which left the employees doing the basic care needs, so infants spent most of their time in their cribs with no stimulation. When a child doesn’t get stimulation, the brain doesn’t develop correctly, “cognitive and emotional growth are stunted” (Marshall, 2014, page 752).

The author wrote “The children’s empty motions, or ‘stereotypies,’ are like the pacing of a tiger or elephant in the zoo” (Marshall, 2014, page 752). The researchers with BEIP decided to fund top of the line foster homes and study the differences between the children in orphanages, those in the foster homes, and those never in institutional care. What they discovered was the children who the orphanages for foster care did have some resilience and bounced back. This was especially true if they were able to leave prior to 24 months, as well as those who spent a short time in the orphanage due to lack of an attentive caregiver.

The researches gathered test results several different times and found the children out of their home scored much lower than the children being raised by their family placing them in the “profound intellectual delay” category. They also completed brain electrical readings (EEG’s) on the children which showed the brains of those left in orphanages were less mature than the other groups. Although the outcomes for the children in the orphanages were disheartening, there were positive outcomes as a result of this research. Since the findings, the Romanian government founded a foster care program which has led to a significant drop in the number of children in orphanages. The article stated many of the children in orphanages today are those who are severely handicapped which makes the reader wonder what the outcomes for those children could be if the foster care program supported them. Hopefully this study, along with continuing research, helps all governments improve their child welfare system.

This article particularly interested me because I work in the child welfare system and I have several personal relationships with people who have been affected by foster care and adoption. My current position at The Division of Child and Family Services is to manage the team that makes placements of foster children and manages our basic foster homes. This article reinforced a lot of my personal beliefs. These were formed from my experiences, especially the importance for children to be in a family setting, ideally with their own family. My team was created for situations where children can’t remain in their homes. Our goal is to find the best matched foster home so children can hopefully have one placement before they are reunified with their family or adopted. With one home, a child is more likely able to build a secure attachment and have caregivers who are providing them with opportunities to grow, such as stimulation.

The article by Marshall (2014) also discussed how neglect can also be more detrimental than abuse, which I have also noticed in my career. Therapeutic interventions and an engaged, loving parent can often help a child heal. This is especially true for a child who has been the victim of abuse or neglect, however it seems like it takes longer and behaviors are more extreme for children who have suffered severe neglect. According to Health First (2019) infants need stimulation for multiple reasons including nervous system development, memory, and a more secure self-image.

Articles like this help me feel more motivated at work to continue advocating for a better foster care system. In our state we have a significant shortage of foster homes, so we are continually working with our community partners to recruit more foster homes. There is an even greater need for homes that can take large sibling groups, children of all ages, and homes that understand and are willing to work with behaviors that result from trauma. We are also constantly advocating and working with the community to provide better services for foster children, foster families, and their biological family. I would love to see a foster care system where a higher level of care (group homes or residential treatment) is rarely needed. This is especially true as research, including this article shows us institutional care has detrimental effects.

This article also made me reflect on the type of stimulus children receive. I recently became a parent and it can be exhausting to find ways to engage your child in activities that provide stimulus to help them grow especially, after a hard day at work or a terrible night of sleep. I want to continue to do research about the risks of using electronic stimulus because I think a lot of Americans use television or tablets to keep their child entertained. American Academy of Pediatrics (2011) recommends no television is recommended until age 2 and technology can increase attention issues in childhood. While this isn’t as extreme as a neglected child it is interesting in the Zero Parenting experiment, they noticed zero parenting led to increases in attention related disorders. I would love to research what programs already exit to teach parents appropriate ways to engage with their child, which increases their self-esteem, attention span, brain growth, and regulation skills.

Article such as this are also beneficial for being a school counselor. In the school setting we are seeing more children who have been exposed to traumatic events such as abuse and neglect. These articles help us understand their behaviors and survival skills, while giving us hope of positive outcomes with good interventions. Another reason I would like to find programs about engaging with your child is to use in my role as a school counselor. I can use these while working with children, give tips to other school personal as needed, and refer programs to parents when appropriate. I love that there is more information available on trauma and how to help children affected by trauma, as well as prevent bad outcomes in the future for our future children.

References

  1. American Academy of Pediatrics. (2011). Media Use for Children Younger than 2 Years. Pediatrics, 128, 1-6
  2. Infant Stimulation. (2019). Retrieved September 15, 2019, from https://hf.org/health_info/your_health_first/kids/infant_stim.cfm
  3. Marshall, E. (2014). An Experiment in Zero Parenting. Science Magazine, 345, 752-754

Foster Care: Research Paper Thesis

As the existing literature has shown, there are many interrelated factors that contribute to sexual victimization in youth post-foster care. Firstly, it is important to reflect on how adverse childhood experiences set forth a trajectory of risk for sexual victimization in foster care youth. Studies have found that the existence of child abuse, both sexual and physical in nature, was correlated with an increased risk for sexual street victimization later (Tyler & Schmitz, 2018). It was also noted that a history of abuse in childhood was related to homeless youth experiencing mental health issues (Tyler & Schmitz, 2018). This helps demonstrate the way that factors are inter-correlated with one another and can act as either triggers or responses to negative outcomes. Aged-out foster care youth who have experienced abuse and trauma as a child are more likely to use substances, and thereby put themselves at risk of sexual victimization (Rebbe et al., 2017). Thereafter, the emotional and mental trauma experienced from the sexual victimization can further reinforce negative coping strategies and predispose homeless youth to re-victimization (Bender et al., 2016). All in all, it is evident that a wide range of factors contribute to a risk of sexual victimization in homeless youth including substance use, history of violence and abuse, and using sex as a means for survival (Heerde & Hemphill, 2016).

Current Initiatives

There is no single factor that causes aged-out foster care youth to become homeless and experience sexual victimization. The literature supports the thesis that there is a significant correlation between adverse effects related to foster care and the likelihood of homelessness and sexual victimization. The reality is, that this topic is very complex and there are many contributing events that can either ameliorate or exacerbate the negative issues faced by aged-out foster care youth. Within the existing research on this topic, there is a lack of solid information regarding the various programs which are currently being used to assist aged-out foster care youth. There are housing-first initiatives in place which are designed to help youth aging-out of foster care, but there is not enough supply for the demand, and a lack of concordant initiatives which go along with the housing (Roebeck, 2008). Dworsky et al. (2013) briefly reflect on the current transitional housing programs which exist to help youth move towards independent living, however, they explain that “little is known about the extent to which these programs prevent homelessness or promote long-term housing stability” (Dworsky et al., 2013, pg. 322). A majority of the resources available to homeless youth who have aged out of foster care are in the regular food and shelter programs for homeless individuals in general (Tyler & Schmitz, 2018). These programs have limited supply, and do not provide extra help for youth who have come from the foster-care system, and those who were sexually victimized. Additionally, many resource centers are non-profit or rely on donations to operate. One Vancouver-based example is the youth division of the Family Services of Greater Vancouver (FSGV). It has resources available 365 days a year and focuses on helping homeless youth with addiction treatment, support services, and both short term housing (FSGV, 2019). This program, along with others, offers support systems which do not expand beyond a limited range of resources, funding, and do not target all issues faced by homeless youth. With the limitations on existing programs identified, the following section reviews what should be done in the future to better assist homeless youth. An emphasis will be placed specifically on how to deal with youth who have experienced sexual victimization, as well as how to prevent it.

Future Initiatives

It is evident that there is an immediate need for reform in policies related to aiding youth who are aging out of foster care, as well as intervention initiatives for those who have become homeless and face victimization in the streets already. A majority of the existing articles related to this subject identify priorities for future direction, and what programs should focus on to best suit the individual needs of aged-out foster care youth. Many of these articles suggest implications for the future, because there is a lack of current targeted social initiatives to prevent adverse effects resulting from the foster care system. It is argued that foster youth need special attention and resources because they “do not receive the social support that is typical of their general population peers” (Rebbe et al., 2017, pg. 108)

There is an especially pressing need for supportive housing interventions which are specifically targeted towards youth who are aging-out of foster care (Fowler at al., 2009). Although social workers often work with youth to discuss their future housing plans (Dworsky et al., 2013), there is not enough support and immediate housing to aid their transition into independent living. If youth are not transitioning into a stable living environment, there is an increased chance of homelessness and, therefore, street victimization (Bender et al., 2015). The lack of government provided supportive housing options, creates the inadvertent effect of forcing youth into unpleasant situations and having them turn to substances and unhealthy means of finding housing and income. As noted by Dworsky et al. (2013) a higher priority of planning and post-transition assistance should be given to youths with a history of mental health concerns, as well as those who have been abused. There is evidence which suggests that youth who have experienced sexual victimization in the streets face unique barriers to maintaining stable living conditions (Slesnick et al., 2016). Future initiatives must effectively address the complex issues surrounding youth who have experienced sexual victimization and create systems which ensure the best possible chance of a positive outcome and stability. Future programs for housing should also focus on building youth up, and effectively preparing them for life outside of the system. Within the housing initiatives, as well as for youth who are still in foster care placements, targeted workshops should be implemented which seek to help youth succeed. Providing directed employment opportunities and skill building tools for youth can mean the difference between maintaining employment and remaining jobless. It is also important to ensure resources for mental health, family planning, and addiction prevention and treatment are available.

Another key factor which should be discussed, are the victim services which assist youth who have been sexually victimized. Currently, youth can receive support through the Child and Youth Advocacy Centers (CYAC), from a variety of multidisciplinary services (Wemmers, 2017). The number of these centers across the country has grown over the past decade and aims to help youth with reducing their mental and emotional traumas after victimization (Wemmers, 2017). The CYAC are great resources, but there needs to be a greater expansion of these services to better reach all the youth that need help. In Quebec, for example, there is only one CYAC in the entire province (Wemmers, 2017). Further reform is also needed within victim services programs, with adequate numbers of properly trained staff. One article argues that service providers and teachers who work in programs which cater to aged-out foster care youth, should have trauma-informed training in order to effectively combat the negative life course trends of the youth (Rebbe et al., 2017). Within programs which aim to assist aged-out foster care youth who have been sexually victimized, a delicate approach must be taken. The existing literature agrees that the adverse experiences in foster care are a main contributor to future sexual victimization (Tyler & Schmitz, 2018). Targeting early instances of victimization and providing extensive safety measures for youth in foster care should be the first step to preventing homelessness and sexual victimization. It has been suggested that the most effective way of dealing with each individual case is to accurately identify their adverse childhood experiences (Rebbe et al., 2017), as well as personal resulting issues such as addiction. Because each individual youth will have their own complex history of issues, as well as their current struggles, effective initiatives will address all aspects (Slesnick et al., 2016). The United Nations Declaration acknowledges the importance of aiding victims who require special protection (Wemmers, 2017). There is a dire need for reform in the realm of Canadian initiatives towards protecting victims who need the extra protection measures, emphasizing children and youth. Young people are an especially vulnerable population, and victim services which cater towards this sub-group are crucial. In relation to the topic of sexual victimization in homeless youth, it is crucial to note that victim service reform should be viewed as a secondary program. Primary programs should aim to target the root social causes of youth homelessness and adverse conditions in foster care alike. Victim services for youth who have experienced sexual victimization after becoming homeless are vulnerable and in need of an array of supportive assistance. In Canada, roughly one third of programs for victims revolve around sexual violence, but there is a lack of specific targeted resources for youth (Wemmers, 2017).

Recommendations

Within the existing reports and articles related to the topic of homeless aged-out foster care youth and sexual victimization, there are extensive recommendations which shed light on what components are crucial to implement. A report prepared for the Institute for the Prevention of Crime made specific recommendations in relation to this issue. The author posits that there should be both an improvement in release policies from foster care, as well as victim assistance for youth in care (Roebuck, 2008). There is also a section of the report dedicated strictly to homelessness and victimization, which puts an emphasis on foster care planning. Some of the key recommendations regarding foster care youth include: to provide financial support for independent living, improved training for life skills, and providing individualized advice and help for decision-making (Roebeck, 2008). Both Roebeck’s (2008) report and an article by Rebbe et al. (2017) mentioned the need for in depth review of policies surrounding the foster care system and determining the impact of age on predisposition to homelessness. Increasing the age of transition to 21 years old instead of 18 would make a notable difference, and research has shown that negative outcomes can be reduced if youth are allowed to remain in foster care longer (Fowler et al., 2009). The B.C. Coroners Service (2018) report mentioned the need for better engagement between youth and policymakers on the reform of policies related to foster care and transitions therefrom. These articles all suggest that there is room for reform and development within the existing policies in the foster care system. Other recommendations made by the B.C. Coroners Service (2018) also apply. The report was made to investigate deaths of youth who were currently or formerly in foster care, and what contributed to the rates of mortality specifically in this population. The report found many of the deaths were related to homelessness, mental health issues and substance abuse. These issues were mentioned frequently in the existing literature on post-foster care youth. Some of the recommendations made by the coroner’s report include better communication amongst service providers, extending support services to fit each youth’s needs, and more research to determine outcomes for police implications (B.C. Coroners Service, 2018). It is clear, that the existing initiatives do not provide adequate programs for aged out foster care youth and the resources they need for combatting sexual victimization specifically. The resulting initiatives will no doubt require a homogenous effort between government agencies, support services, and housing and lifestyle programs. Combatting every instance of sexual victimization or adverse effect related to becoming homeless after foster care is not realistic. There can, however, be significant improvements made to the lives of youth through collective and collaborative efforts on both micro and macro levels with the existing recommendations in mind.

Conclusion

In summary, there are many contributing factors to the sexual victimization of aged-out foster care youth. Factors which were discussed thoroughly in the existing literature have been shown to both predict sexual violence, as well as be responses to the victimizations. Some of these factors include childhood adversities, gender differences, substance use, and mental health issues. There is currently a lack of both prevention and intervention programs to combat these issues, as well as resources for homeless youth. The literature does not identify many examples of existing initiatives but provides suggestions for where funding should be allocated and where reform is needed. Future initiatives must take a trauma-informed approach to dealing with youth who have been aged-out of the foster care system and become homeless and victimized. Programs must ensure that resources are available to target a plethora of issues, and address both the predispositions to sexual victimization as well as the resulting adversities faced thereafter. Furthermore, better recognition is needed in relation to this issue, and government policies must reflect the growing need to improve the foster care system and exiting strategies. All in all, the research suggests that there is room for exponential growth to assist youth when they have become homeless and sexually victimized, in the forms of prevention, intervention, and response initiatives

Adoption Vs Foster Care Paper

One of the purposes of the U.S. child welfare system is to reunify children with their parents or to offer children permanency, or long-term, living arrangements rather through guardianship or adoption. In 2016 alone, over 100,000 children were removed from their homes and placed into foster care (“Number of Children”, 2017). As a whole, there are over 430,000 children in the United States foster care system and approximately 112,000 of these children are waiting to be adopted (Ahmann,2017). Based on reports by the Children’s Bureau at HHS’ Administration for Children and Families (ACF), the number of children in foster care in 2016 increased to 437,500 from 427,400 reported in the previous year (“Number of Children”, 2017). With the increase of children entering foster care, foster care adoptions also increased from 54,000 in 2015 to 57,000 in 2016. While the incline in adoption is great, this data also illustrates that a vast majority of the children who enter foster care do not progress into long-term placement, which can subject children who grow out of the foster care system to poor adult outcomes.

The deficit in adoption and permanent placement may be attributed to the adoption seeking parent’s preferences in characteristics of the adoptive child. The National Survey of Family Growth found that a number of families who began the adoption process actually adopt a child (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). And those surveyed held very strong preferences for race, age, disability status and if the child had other adoptive siblings, but there were only a few conditions the families held no preferences such as gender or religious affiliation (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). Of these preferences, the children who seem to be at the biggest disadvantage within the foster care system were African American and older children, individually.

Children from African American families were found to be 3x more likely reported to Child Protective Services (CPS) compared to children from any other race (Maloney, Jiang, Putnam-Hornstein, Dalton & Vaithianathan, 2017). Risk factors such as unemployment rates, educational attainment, poverty levels and overall lack of resources increases the likelihood of CPS involvement in African American families. In 2017, approximately 20% of births in black families in the United States were teenage mothers compared to the teenage births in white families that was 3.8% (Moloney, et al., 2017). Black families are also leading with 42% of children in foster care, followed by 32% white, 15% Latino and 2% Native American or Asian (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). African American children take up a large percentage of the foster care system.

Most Caucasian women seeking to adopt a child have a strong preference for a Caucasian child, but 73% say that they would accept African American children; however, only about 5% of these individuals who say they are willing to adopt African American children truly do (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). Similarly, African American women share their preference for an African-American child but would be accepting of Caucasian child (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). Potential adoptive parents shared that these preferences were based on the possibilities of adjustment issues or other problems that could occur from a transracial placement. And while families are entitled to their choices, a large number of children are also being overlooked for adoption.

Most women looking to adopt children express preference in adopting younger children; About 60% of the potential adoptive parents preferred a child that was under 2 years old of age, almost 90% were accepting of a child between the ages of 2 and 4; however, only 30% were willing to accept a child that was over 12 years old (Brooks, James & Barth, 2002). These preferences greatly reduces the chances of most children in foster care being adopted. About 43% of the children in foster care are 8 years or older and half of those children have been in the system for over two years while 33% have been in foster care for over three years (Ahmann, 2017). Additionally, children that are not adopted at the age of 8 have a very small likelihood of being adopted while children who are 12 years or older are almost certain to age out of the foster care system before they are adopted (Ahmann, 2017).

Older children are often viewed as at-risk due to their perceived inability to effectively adapt to new foster parents, as well as their high emotional and behavioral needs (White, 2016). It is a traumatic experience when children have to separate from their original caregivers but it is even more traumatic when a child is continuously changes placements just to later re-enter foster care and constantly readjust (Maloney et al., 2017). In fact, over 20,000 teens were emancipated from foster care in 2015 alone without having a permanent placement (Ahmann, 2017). These adverse experiences with placements within foster care only yield negative outcomes in their adult life.

These youth who exit the foster care system without being reunified with their family or finding placement are at the highest risk for negative outcomes compared to those who never entered the foster care system. Only half of youth who exit foster care obtain a high school diploma, 41% have some involvement with criminal justice system, over 30% experience some form of homelessness and 40% do not have enough funds to meet basic needs (Ahmann, 2017). In terms of mental health, over half of all assessed foster care alumni between 20 and 33 years of age, met the criteria for at least one mental health disorder compared to 21% of individuals within the general population in a similar age group (Garcia et al., 2015). And approximately 30% of those who met criteria suffer from post-traumatic stress disorder or PTSD, but only one in five emancipated youth actually receive mental health services (Ahmann, 2017). With such, foster children lacking permanent placement goes beyond housing, but this inconsistency and discontinuity in placement affects their life in many other aspects.

I have worked in various roles within group homes with children in foster care. While the foster care system’s main goal is to ensure the safety of all children through reunification or permanent placement, children receiving adequate care, support, and autonomy is just as important. Although I do not work in the foster care setting anymore, I am passionate about children within foster care getting the necessary resources that they need to live a more fulfilling life during foster care and well after. There needs to be more resources that are provided to help youth who age out of foster care.

While there is funding in place to support foster children as they age out of foster care, there is no doubt a high percentage of foster youth do not prosper after leaving foster care. Having the appropriate support while navigating through early adulthood is important. Many youth aging out of foster care have relationships with adults who offer support such as their social worker or counselor, but these relationships are usually very professional and vary greatly from support that one may get from a family member (Ahmann, 2017). The Family & Youth Initiative found that these more personable relationships yielded better results for children exiting foster care as they are able to develop a trusting bond with others outside of the foster care system and these more diverse social networks help with their overall life satisfaction (Ahman, 2017). Requiring mentorship programs upon exiting foster care could help youth adjust to life outside of foster care as well as help with their career development, housing stability, and overall wellness. When youth enter the foster care system, it is our duty to make sure that they have all possible resources to live a viable life and their life goes beyond foster care.

References

  1. Ahmann, E. (2017). Supporting Youth Aging Out of Foster Care. Pediatric Nursing, 43(1), 43–48. Retrieved from http://search.ebscohost.com.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/login.aspx?direct=true&db=asn&AN=121353604
  2. Brooks, D., James, S., & Barth, R. P. (2002). Preferred Characteristics of Children in Need of Adoption: Is There a Demand for Available Foster Children? Social Service Review, 76(4), 575. https://doi-org.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.1086/342996
  3. Garcia, et al(2015). Adverse Childhood Experiences and Poor Mental Health Outcomes Among Racially Diverse Foster Care Alumni: Impact of Perceived Agency Helpfulness. Journal of Child & Family Studies, 24(11), 3293–3305. https://doi-org.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.1007/s10826-015-0132-8
  4. Maloney, T., Jiang, N., Putnam-Hornstein, E., Dalton, E., & Vaithianathan, R. (2017). Black-White Differences in Child Maltreatment Reports and Foster Care Placements: A Statistical Decomposition Using Linked Administrative Data. Maternal & Child Health Journal (Vol. 21, pp. 414–420). https://doiorg.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.1007/s10995-016-2242-3
  5. Number of children in foster care continues to increase. (2017). Retrieved from https://www.acf.hhs.gov/media/press/2017/number-of-children-in-foster-care-continues-to-increase
  6. White, K. (2016). Placement Discontinuity for Older Children and Adolescents Who Exit Foster Care Through Adoption Or Guardianship: A Systematic Review. Child & Adolescent Social Work Journal, 33(4), 377–394. https://doi-org.proxy2.library.illinois.edu/10.1007/s10560-015-0425-1