Foster Care
or
Stranger Danger
April 1, 2016
G.D.O'Bradovich III
introduction
Inexact repetition is a well established hallmark of esoteric writing and we wonder if the use of synonyms or, perhaps more accurately, the excessive use of synonyms is an example or variation of inexact repetition. Alternately, excessive use of synonyms may be an infelicity of the author's writing style.
Oftentimes we find in the atheistic writings of the alleged Church Fathers indulgences that linger upon seemingly insignificance details and excessive explorations of those details. We suggest that when the entirety of their commentary upon a given theme is correctly understood, the astute reader may realize that the veritable subject is not the expressly stated topic.
Oftentimes we find in the atheistic writings of the alleged Church Fathers indulgences that linger upon seemingly insignificance details and excessive explorations of those details. We suggest that when the entirety of their commentary upon a given theme is correctly understood, the astute reader may realize that the veritable subject is not the expressly stated topic.
part the first
Courtesy of Wikipedia, our understanding of foster will be “a system in which a minor has been placed into a ward, group home, or private home of a state-certified caregiver referred to as a "foster parent". The placement of the child is normally arranged through the government or a social-service agency.”
We immediately understand that this definition has various aspects of being unnatural, although the state has expressly stated, through statues, the welfare of future citizens is, if not a priority, then important. We readily acknowledge that the state is an artificial entity, and therefore unnatural, and we cannot but wonder it foster care is so far removed from nature and Nature's intent, as to be detrimental to these children.
Unfortunately, readily available statistics have not been found and we will rely upon this article for our commentary, courtesy of the Huffington Post [Vide].
Foster children “were more likely than other students to change schools during the school year. About 1 in 10 students in foster care attended three or more schools during the year compared to about 1 in 100 of the general student population and their “low socioeconomic status” peers (those eligible for free and reduced-priced lunch or whose parents have not received a high school diploma).”
Foster children are subjected to attending multiple schools at a rate that is ten times the rate of the general student population. Since we are not informed of the reasons, we cannot know.
Foster children “were more likely than the general student population to attend the lowest performing schools.”
This fact is due to entirely to location of the foster parent's housing.
Foster children “had the lowest participation rate in the statewide testing program, making it impossible to accurately determine how they are performing.”
This fact could be explained by frequent school changes. Although it is “impossible” to determine performance, we read about their performance in the following paragraph:
Foster children “fell into “below basic” and “far below basic” performance levels for English language arts and mathematics at twice the rate of the statewide student population and performed worse than their low socioeconomic status peers. They performed similarly to English learners and students with disabilities in English, but did worse than all groups in math.”
Academically speaking, it seems as though foster children are the worst of the worst, as they under perform their “low socioeconomic status peers.” We do not know if the reason for these performance levels is due to English being a second language.
Foster children “had a lower graduation rate; 58 percent compared to 84 percent for all students, 79 percent for low socioeconomic status students, 65 percent for students with disabilities, and 60 percent for English language learners.”
If graduation were the goal of foster care, then it is obviously a failure when compared to all students and when compared to three groups of students. We doubt that decades of low graduation rates would be tolerated if this was among the criteria for foster children, therefore we presume graduation rates are not a priority or concern of the state.
Foster children “were clustered in a small number of districts. Two-thirds were enrolled in 10 percent of the state’s school districts. Identifying where these students are and targeting services there is critical to closing this achievement gap for California and the rest of the nation.”
This data may be only applicable to California and we have included it for completeness. However, we would not be surprised to learn that this fact is relevant nationwide, as we are aware of “good” schools and “bad” schools in our communities.
It seems that if the state did not intervene into the lives of these children, then it seems the majority of these children would graduate from high school at a similar rate of their peers. From the information provided, we cannot determine if foster care children are representative of the general population or if their membership is restricted to those with the least potential to graduate from high school and college.
We immediately understand that this definition has various aspects of being unnatural, although the state has expressly stated, through statues, the welfare of future citizens is, if not a priority, then important. We readily acknowledge that the state is an artificial entity, and therefore unnatural, and we cannot but wonder it foster care is so far removed from nature and Nature's intent, as to be detrimental to these children.
Unfortunately, readily available statistics have not been found and we will rely upon this article for our commentary, courtesy of the Huffington Post [Vide].
Foster children “were more likely than other students to change schools during the school year. About 1 in 10 students in foster care attended three or more schools during the year compared to about 1 in 100 of the general student population and their “low socioeconomic status” peers (those eligible for free and reduced-priced lunch or whose parents have not received a high school diploma).”
Foster children are subjected to attending multiple schools at a rate that is ten times the rate of the general student population. Since we are not informed of the reasons, we cannot know.
Foster children “were more likely than the general student population to attend the lowest performing schools.”
This fact is due to entirely to location of the foster parent's housing.
Foster children “had the lowest participation rate in the statewide testing program, making it impossible to accurately determine how they are performing.”
This fact could be explained by frequent school changes. Although it is “impossible” to determine performance, we read about their performance in the following paragraph:
Foster children “fell into “below basic” and “far below basic” performance levels for English language arts and mathematics at twice the rate of the statewide student population and performed worse than their low socioeconomic status peers. They performed similarly to English learners and students with disabilities in English, but did worse than all groups in math.”
Academically speaking, it seems as though foster children are the worst of the worst, as they under perform their “low socioeconomic status peers.” We do not know if the reason for these performance levels is due to English being a second language.
Foster children “had a lower graduation rate; 58 percent compared to 84 percent for all students, 79 percent for low socioeconomic status students, 65 percent for students with disabilities, and 60 percent for English language learners.”
If graduation were the goal of foster care, then it is obviously a failure when compared to all students and when compared to three groups of students. We doubt that decades of low graduation rates would be tolerated if this was among the criteria for foster children, therefore we presume graduation rates are not a priority or concern of the state.
Foster children “were clustered in a small number of districts. Two-thirds were enrolled in 10 percent of the state’s school districts. Identifying where these students are and targeting services there is critical to closing this achievement gap for California and the rest of the nation.”
This data may be only applicable to California and we have included it for completeness. However, we would not be surprised to learn that this fact is relevant nationwide, as we are aware of “good” schools and “bad” schools in our communities.
It seems that if the state did not intervene into the lives of these children, then it seems the majority of these children would graduate from high school at a similar rate of their peers. From the information provided, we cannot determine if foster care children are representative of the general population or if their membership is restricted to those with the least potential to graduate from high school and college.
part the second
The following quotes are from an article from “Stir”. [Vide]
“When 22 percent of any child population flees the system which adults have provided to keep them safe, something is wrong.”
We suggest that the author recognizes that an aspect of the system is “wrong”, but does not realize that the cause may be the unnaturalness of the system, that is, people raising unrelated children.
“Foster care alumni are five times more likely to commit suicide and eight times more likely to be hospitalized for a serious psychiatric disorder.”
Since foster children exceed their peers, it might seem to the causal reader that children are in the foster care system because of the likelihood for suicide and psychiatric disorders. The exact methods the state utilizes for identifying these children are not explained.
“Child abuse and neglect occur across all racial, socioeconomic, religious, and cultural lines, yet most children who enter foster care are from impoverished homes.”
We are suspicious of the suggested correlation between poverty and suicide and psychiatric disorders.
“Three quarters of the children who come into foster care have suffered neglect. One in 11 has been sexually abused. One in six, the victim of physical abuse.”
We are more confident that neglected children may display higher rates of suicide and physiological disorders. However, our confidence is not certainty.
“The intersection of the rights of parents with the child’s rights to safety, permanency, and well-being is at the heart of every child welfare case.”
We note that the child has no right to an education or a high school degree and we are perplexed as to why the author stresses the lack of educational attainment, since education is not listed as a right.
“In other words, abused and neglected children live in foster homes with adults who have less education, less disposable income, and a higher child-to-adult ratio than most American families.”
Abused and neglected children are allowed to be cared for by the least capable adults. It seems reasonable that these least capable adults live in areas that they can afford housing and send their foster children to schools that are supported by less property taxes and parent involvement.
“In 2012, almost 200,000 children were in non-relative or “stranger” foster care.”
Of the 73.7 million children in 2012, only 2.7% live in foster care. The author has provided us with a new term “stranger” care to describe foster care, yet the there is no exploration of this unnatural government sponsored phenomena that seems to destroy the well-being of the majority of those who participate in the system.
“Every set of parents [had] different ideas about what mattered. Situations that create such cognitive dissonance would be stressful for anyone, but for children who are expected to conform to adult value systems, it accentuates the distress of being separated from their known world. It’s one more way to feel you don’t belong.”
Cognitive dissonance is described as “the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change”. This definition could be applied to anyone, not only those in stranger care. Although child has a right to “safety, permanency, and well-being”, a sense of belonging is not a right to the social animals that are under consideration. Is is possible the state has overlooked one of defining characteristics of man in their quest to insure the care of children to strangers?
“A 2010 Casey Family study of adult alumni in Washington and Oregon found that one in three former foster children reported being abused by an adult in the foster home.”
We are confused by the term “alumni” and we suggest that it is an attempt to write esoterically. The merits of this attempt will be decided by the Gentle Reader. “Alumni” are typically graduates from universities and universities are frequently referred to as “alma maters”, that is, fostering or nourishing mothers. We are not amused by the attempt at humorous wordplay.
“However, when adult after adult is unable to meet a child’s needs, children internalize the failure as their own, and generalize a lack of trust to all adults. In worst case scenarios, they learn not to trust anyone.”
Foster children feel that they do not belong to any one group and lack the ability to trust adults. We are curious if former foster children, that is, when they graduate from stranger care and become alumni, trust children and whether these interactions with children result in abuse; whether mental, sexual or physical.
“Foster children are given psychotropic medications 12 times as frequently as other low-income children living with their biological families. The Casey Family study showed they experience Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) at twice the rate of Iraqi war veterans.”
Once again, we are uncertain how the state identifies a population that will need psychotropic medications at a rate significantly higher than the general population. We wonder if the author has given any thought as to the reason why those children in stranger care have PTSD higher than war veterans. However, we are not surprised to learn that when a minority of the population is selected by the state to endure years of stress in stranger care, the result is that this population is given psychotropic medication at rates higher than those “living with their biological families.”
“By the age of 25, 81 percent of all male foster care alumni had been arrested once, and 35 percent had been incarcerated. Adults who had been in foster care as children suffered worse prognoses than their peers in almost all domains (foster care/general population):”
“When 22 percent of any child population flees the system which adults have provided to keep them safe, something is wrong.”
We suggest that the author recognizes that an aspect of the system is “wrong”, but does not realize that the cause may be the unnaturalness of the system, that is, people raising unrelated children.
“Foster care alumni are five times more likely to commit suicide and eight times more likely to be hospitalized for a serious psychiatric disorder.”
Since foster children exceed their peers, it might seem to the causal reader that children are in the foster care system because of the likelihood for suicide and psychiatric disorders. The exact methods the state utilizes for identifying these children are not explained.
“Child abuse and neglect occur across all racial, socioeconomic, religious, and cultural lines, yet most children who enter foster care are from impoverished homes.”
We are suspicious of the suggested correlation between poverty and suicide and psychiatric disorders.
“Three quarters of the children who come into foster care have suffered neglect. One in 11 has been sexually abused. One in six, the victim of physical abuse.”
We are more confident that neglected children may display higher rates of suicide and physiological disorders. However, our confidence is not certainty.
“The intersection of the rights of parents with the child’s rights to safety, permanency, and well-being is at the heart of every child welfare case.”
We note that the child has no right to an education or a high school degree and we are perplexed as to why the author stresses the lack of educational attainment, since education is not listed as a right.
“In other words, abused and neglected children live in foster homes with adults who have less education, less disposable income, and a higher child-to-adult ratio than most American families.”
Abused and neglected children are allowed to be cared for by the least capable adults. It seems reasonable that these least capable adults live in areas that they can afford housing and send their foster children to schools that are supported by less property taxes and parent involvement.
“In 2012, almost 200,000 children were in non-relative or “stranger” foster care.”
Of the 73.7 million children in 2012, only 2.7% live in foster care. The author has provided us with a new term “stranger” care to describe foster care, yet the there is no exploration of this unnatural government sponsored phenomena that seems to destroy the well-being of the majority of those who participate in the system.
“Every set of parents [had] different ideas about what mattered. Situations that create such cognitive dissonance would be stressful for anyone, but for children who are expected to conform to adult value systems, it accentuates the distress of being separated from their known world. It’s one more way to feel you don’t belong.”
Cognitive dissonance is described as “the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change”. This definition could be applied to anyone, not only those in stranger care. Although child has a right to “safety, permanency, and well-being”, a sense of belonging is not a right to the social animals that are under consideration. Is is possible the state has overlooked one of defining characteristics of man in their quest to insure the care of children to strangers?
“A 2010 Casey Family study of adult alumni in Washington and Oregon found that one in three former foster children reported being abused by an adult in the foster home.”
We are confused by the term “alumni” and we suggest that it is an attempt to write esoterically. The merits of this attempt will be decided by the Gentle Reader. “Alumni” are typically graduates from universities and universities are frequently referred to as “alma maters”, that is, fostering or nourishing mothers. We are not amused by the attempt at humorous wordplay.
“However, when adult after adult is unable to meet a child’s needs, children internalize the failure as their own, and generalize a lack of trust to all adults. In worst case scenarios, they learn not to trust anyone.”
Foster children feel that they do not belong to any one group and lack the ability to trust adults. We are curious if former foster children, that is, when they graduate from stranger care and become alumni, trust children and whether these interactions with children result in abuse; whether mental, sexual or physical.
“Foster children are given psychotropic medications 12 times as frequently as other low-income children living with their biological families. The Casey Family study showed they experience Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) at twice the rate of Iraqi war veterans.”
Once again, we are uncertain how the state identifies a population that will need psychotropic medications at a rate significantly higher than the general population. We wonder if the author has given any thought as to the reason why those children in stranger care have PTSD higher than war veterans. However, we are not surprised to learn that when a minority of the population is selected by the state to endure years of stress in stranger care, the result is that this population is given psychotropic medication at rates higher than those “living with their biological families.”
“By the age of 25, 81 percent of all male foster care alumni had been arrested once, and 35 percent had been incarcerated. Adults who had been in foster care as children suffered worse prognoses than their peers in almost all domains (foster care/general population):”
PTSD: Depression: Anxiety: Addiction/alcoholism: Males convicted of a crime: Homeless for more than one day: |
Foster Care
25.0% 24.3% 43.0% 11.1% 60.0% 22.0% |
General Population
4.5% 10.6% 5.1% 2.5% 10.0% 2.0% |
By now, it is obvious to even the most causal reader that specific criteria must exist and used by the state to extract those with the least potential to succeed in society and place them in stranger care.
“The largest studies undertaken ... found that with the exception of the most severe cases of abuse, even comparably maltreated children who remained at home fared better than maltreated children placed in foster care.”
From the numbers alone, we conclude that if the stranger care system were eliminated, the vast majority of children would become successful adults at the same rate as the general population.
“Of those who graduate high school, two percent of former foster children achieve a Bachelor’s Degree, compared to 20 percent of adults who were never in care.”
Either stranger care children are targeted due to to their lack of potential or an issue exists when children are raised by strangers that does not manifest itself or is identifiable until adulthood.
“But some evidence suggests that even good homes with well-trained providers contribute to adverse long term outcomes.”
This insight “suggests” that for some inexplicable reason, the long term outcome of being subjected to stranger care has an “adverse” outcome on the adult alumni.
“Although the children I fostered made many positive gains in personal, educational, and social development, their transitions into adulthood were consistent with other foster alumni who struggle with drug abuse, mental health disorders, incarceration, early pregnancy, and homelessness.”
The author acknowledges that while her stranger care children benefited from “personal, educational, and social development”, their failures were consistent with other stranger care alumni.
“The largest studies undertaken ... found that with the exception of the most severe cases of abuse, even comparably maltreated children who remained at home fared better than maltreated children placed in foster care.”
From the numbers alone, we conclude that if the stranger care system were eliminated, the vast majority of children would become successful adults at the same rate as the general population.
“Of those who graduate high school, two percent of former foster children achieve a Bachelor’s Degree, compared to 20 percent of adults who were never in care.”
Either stranger care children are targeted due to to their lack of potential or an issue exists when children are raised by strangers that does not manifest itself or is identifiable until adulthood.
“But some evidence suggests that even good homes with well-trained providers contribute to adverse long term outcomes.”
This insight “suggests” that for some inexplicable reason, the long term outcome of being subjected to stranger care has an “adverse” outcome on the adult alumni.
“Although the children I fostered made many positive gains in personal, educational, and social development, their transitions into adulthood were consistent with other foster alumni who struggle with drug abuse, mental health disorders, incarceration, early pregnancy, and homelessness.”
The author acknowledges that while her stranger care children benefited from “personal, educational, and social development”, their failures were consistent with other stranger care alumni.
part the third
The first time reader may suppose we are against all things unnatural. This is not a correct assumption as we are aware that we benefit greatly from automobiles, electricity, and the internet. There are risks associated with these three modern marvels and most adults are aware of the potential dangers. However, if there were a “22 percent” chance of being injured every time one drove a car or turned on a light, then there is no doubt the government would investigate these industries, yet the same standard does not apply to the stranger care system, although the “child welfare industry employs more than one million adults to serve foster children and their families”.
Deb Stone is aware that there is something “wrong” with the system and we suggest that her insights, critiques, and recommendations will only satisfy the causal reader. If the children who are placed in stranger care are representative of the general population, what are the machinations where the best result is mediocrity and the worst result is decadency? The reader may respond with the fact that most children are “from impoverished homes”. Yet, if poverty were the cause of suicides and psychological ills, then it is unlikely that any society could leave the Malthusian trap without recording so many deaths and documenting so many problems. No competent sociologist would suggest that the current third world population is inundated by mental illness, suicides, and stress levels twice that of war veterans because of poverty. We must conclude that mental illness, suicide, and stress are the result of some aspect of stranger care.
If the Gentle Reader will individually review the suggested reasons for the failure of foster care, then he will realize that these criteria are as easily refuted as the idea of poverty.
We do not doubt that the intentions of the state and of foster parents are altruistic. However, we are not concerned with good intentions, as we are justifiably concerned with the deplorable results. The Law of Unintended Consequences?
Perhaps the public is more aware of the abuses of the elderly in long term care facilities than the disservices of the stranger care system. We suggest that the elderly are not relocated anywhere close to the rate that foster children are moved and it is more likely for the abuses to manifest in a larger setting and made public; whereas an individual story of physical abuse is almost so commonplace as to not be noticed by the media, let alone a single example of stress or mental abuse.
We conclude that the abuses in nursing homes and in the stranger care system are the inevitable result of individuals caring for people who are unrelated.
Deb Stone is aware that there is something “wrong” with the system and we suggest that her insights, critiques, and recommendations will only satisfy the causal reader. If the children who are placed in stranger care are representative of the general population, what are the machinations where the best result is mediocrity and the worst result is decadency? The reader may respond with the fact that most children are “from impoverished homes”. Yet, if poverty were the cause of suicides and psychological ills, then it is unlikely that any society could leave the Malthusian trap without recording so many deaths and documenting so many problems. No competent sociologist would suggest that the current third world population is inundated by mental illness, suicides, and stress levels twice that of war veterans because of poverty. We must conclude that mental illness, suicide, and stress are the result of some aspect of stranger care.
If the Gentle Reader will individually review the suggested reasons for the failure of foster care, then he will realize that these criteria are as easily refuted as the idea of poverty.
We do not doubt that the intentions of the state and of foster parents are altruistic. However, we are not concerned with good intentions, as we are justifiably concerned with the deplorable results. The Law of Unintended Consequences?
Perhaps the public is more aware of the abuses of the elderly in long term care facilities than the disservices of the stranger care system. We suggest that the elderly are not relocated anywhere close to the rate that foster children are moved and it is more likely for the abuses to manifest in a larger setting and made public; whereas an individual story of physical abuse is almost so commonplace as to not be noticed by the media, let alone a single example of stress or mental abuse.
We conclude that the abuses in nursing homes and in the stranger care system are the inevitable result of individuals caring for people who are unrelated.
History shows again and again how nature points out the folly of men
Blue Oyster Cult