Now having left the hospital, our little three-year-old heroine is now back at the foster adopt's house. She is still very ill. She has a protruding intestine due to rotavirus and persistent diarrhea.
I understand the daycare is not too happy that CPS did not tell them that one of the little playmates has a highly contagious illness.
The mother is not allowed to visit her sick daughter and give her comfort.
In fact, the mother has had a great deal of trouble in that department. She was directed to find a place where both she and her child could over-night together. That was a very good sign. But, the mother could not find a "residence" that was set up for overnight stays that would take her. The reason for that was because the mother did not have the child. The judge blamed the 19 year-old mother for this.
Why wasn't she just allowed to have visits with her child at the home of the grandparents? This situation defies any reason at all.
By the way...the in-home studies for the grandparents and the aunt/uncle have expired. The relatives are not allowed to re-submit their applications without a request from CPS. So...if you are CPS....you don't tell the judge the studies exist, let them expire, and then just don't ask for a new one.
The department makes small and insignificant motions so they can say they want to reunify...but just look at their behavior. I learned a long time ago you don't listen to what someone says...you look at what they do. The likely outcome of activity tells you what the real goals are.
I actually talked with David Davilar Fox of the department a few weeks ago when things were looking positive.
Fox said, "We were never going to terminate in this case."
Me: "Oh really, then why did you shove termination papers before the judge even before the hearing was held? And, why do you push for termination in EVERY court proceeding?"
Fox: "Oh, that doesn't mean anything."
Well...to him it obviously doesn't.