Wednesday, February 24, 2010

SB 6416 Passes House Committee....But Highly Altered

Once you introduce a bill you never know how far it will get through the process, nor in what form. Such is the case with our bill to give relatives a say in the court room. Let's just say the bill is alive but it has mutated. We are hoping we do not have to kill the beast!

The intent of the House committee was to include foster providers with the same ability to speak in court if they had cared for the child for more than one year. Using the Stuth case as an example that would have given both the Stuths and the foster woman a chance to speak in court.

After the hearing and after the Stuths had left I talked with David Da Villar Fox from the department. His interpretation of the way the bill now reads is that the last person to have "possession" of the child for over one year would have say in court. That is not what anyone believes the House committee had intended. If that were true then the last one who has the ball would win the game. So...with the clock ticking Da Villar, Senate staff, several legislators, and I will be working to get the wording corrected. The House wanted equal footing for fosters in the bill. But, the way this bill is currently worded it gives 100 points to the fosters before the game even starts. All the department would have to do is make sure the fosters had the child for a year and a day!


Anonymous said...

Hi Pam,
When I heard yesterday how this bill was changed I couldn't believe it and wanted to make a comment but also wanted to wait until you posted something on your blog. This bill is certainly not the same as you meant it to be and seems to me to be just for foster parents and not families as it should be both. We all know that DSHS is good at keeping the child out of the house for well over a year as that is there plan and their plan is always evil. So now this bill that you wanted to be of help to families,and we were also foster licensed, is now just for the foster family that has the child last, give me a break. We too are like the family in the facebook article and we are fighters and have also spent a lot of money and are certainly not willing to give up because since when do you give up on your own family? I do not think ever. We are willing to do whatever it takes.
Thank you,
Grandma in Vancouver

Anonymous said...

a year is a really long time in a custody dispute. hopefully this can be cut down to 6 months for just the right to speak in court as a party. My biggest problem is no one ever told us the court dates and times. Even the court clerks are militant against giving out such information if you arnt on the State approved "list".

Whats to stop dshs from yanking kids 364 days into a placement just to avoid legal costs accompanied with new claims to the child? DSHS lawyer make most of their choices based on the "what will cost the state the least" strat.

Anonymous said...

Does this bring to mind Twist and Stick.
I tried to illustrate this in a prior comment on this
legislation wherein I stated that CPS was supportive because they would use
this bill to give unrelated third parties jurisdiction in dependency proceedings.
Sad that every time CPS uses well intentioned law to
continue their agenda of intentional failure to children and their families
instead of "Best interest to Child" rather than "Best interest
of Child" as (STATE CHATTEL.)

gorillamum said...

And CPS will make sure these kids STAY in Foster care for that one year time period you can bet on that. I'm starting to think that it is a no win situation until there are absolute clear lines that these children can only be in Foster care for a maximum of 6 months. That should give these worthless workers time to find a relative. If they can find a relative of a Native American in another State then they can find us. It should not matter if people are Native American or not, a child is a child with family somewhere period! Sorry about my spelling in previous posts. I've been sick with a bug. A not so nice one to boot!

Anonymous said...

That is terrible! I hope it can be corrected!

Anonymous said...

So because your DNA is similar to that of a person who had their child removed you should be blindly considered for a placement over a couple who has been specifically trained to deal with issues the child may have ?

I would think being related to the crack addict or child abuser or whatever would be a check against you.

Anonymous said...

Narrow minded idiot, Most of the children are NOT drug affected. They come from common everyday families. And MOST of these children only have "special Needs while IN foster care." And as for being trained..trained at what? There are more children that are abused, neglected and killed at the hands of the foster people. Check you facts the study have proven that a child has a better chance of survival and less abuse staying in the parents household where there is miminal neglect. Sign up for more classes dumb ass, sounds like your on your way to being a social worker or a CASA!You would be screaming the loudest if it was a child in your family!

Anonymous said...

Or whatever is right! I guess if you have a medical disability don't worry some stranger will take your cute little baby off your hands. Never mind that you have relatives; I guess you could care less about family anyway!

Anonymous said...


Cat said...

This is Cat in Seattle and I do hope you are able to amend that bill to say whomever the child has spent the most time with in the family should be the ones who are considered.

anonymous who is so concerned that children be removed from their families and adopted out to strangers: this is not the right solution. Besides thousands being illegally taken due to the 1000% more funding to do that than to preserve families, you are wrong to think that somehow some "trained" person is better for a child than their own family who loves and understands them far batter than ANY "trained" person could. Children do better in home with their families than being legally kidnapped and raised by strangers:

Obviously you do not care about families ~ only making more money for the state to destroy families: Scroll down to page 13 in that study and it will show you graphically how many billions are being used in "the Adoption and Foster Care Indsutrial Complex.

Literally 1000% more is used to destroy families and the incentives for judges, CASA and CPS workers to rubber stamp everything means they keep their jobs off the backs of little kids and the families they decimate.

Please be careful about "trained" people. As Will rogers said once, "The most dangerous man in the whole world is someone who has a whole lot of book knowledge but confuses that with wisdom ..."

Pam I am SO proud of your work. Kepp it up!

Cat In Seattle