System Solutions vs Parental Solutions

This is a long post, but an incredibly important one.  We'd like to ask all our readers to please stay with us until the end.  Throughout the adoption process there are various snags, snafus and sometimes, even landmines to navigate.  The battle for orphans, their lives, their sanity, and their very souls can be intense.  With older children, if its not intense enough just dealing with their undersocialized, unstructured and at times, unruly behavior, it often seems that there is this collision of idealogies that exists between the systems that are charged with the care of these children and the parental philosophies of those who accepted the challenged of providing a forever home and parents.  We have encountered this collision of idealogies several times along the way while caring for our 4 new children. 

One of those collisions occurred recently when we received an email from our social worker outlining a conversation she had with the social workers from the children's placing agency. Our social worker indicated that there is apparently a court order for the placing agency and other state personnel to have contact with us and the children each month.  Additionally, we were informed that the children’s care plan allegedly calls for psychotherapy, play therapy and for some of our children, speech therapy. We have searched through our paperwork and could not find either the court order or a copy of the care plan. We saw a form that we signed obligating us to participate in a care plan development, but we have had neither participation in the plan and have not even seen the plan. This blog is intended not to bash the system or point out breakdowns in communication, but to express our ideas about the philosophy that drives these recommendations on the alleged care plan.  That is to say we are opposed to involving the children in all these various services at this time for several very important reasons.  We would like to express our ideas and what distinguishes them as parental ideas vs. system ideas of caring for children.

Our first idea focuses on the historical instability in the children's lives and the need for a strong season of stable bonding.  These children have moved so many, many times and to the point that they expect to move again any day now.  Every time we do our monthly post-adoption placement visits, our children's behavior regress unbelievably and it takes another 2-3 weeks, literally, before they settle back into a safe, secure routine.  Their behavior screams (sometimes literally!) of the fact that nothing has been stable in their life. You can observe, sense and feel their anxiety, as they wonder if they will be removed from the home, because after all, in their worlds, that's what the social worker does...removes them from home and places them in a temporary shelter.  They have been conditioned to an adult just telling them where they will be and taking them there.  No explanation of their long term future, just that you're safe and will be fed today.  Perhaps some of the placements have taken a shot at structure and instruction, but little investment in their long term welfare and destinies, if you will. 

 

Don't get me wrong, there is value in securing a child's evening or day, but at some point that care plan needs to shift to the long term vision and destiny of a child.  That requires concentrated effort that only comes through a bonded relationship.  We have spent the first 90 days trying to bond with the children and getting them accustomed to responding to our voice. The children are responding positively to this approach and developing a parent/child relationship that they have never known.  The process begs the question, Why do we want to introduce 1, 2 or more other voices instructing them right now?  In my opinion, which also includes 30 years of clinical psychology experience, that idea does not make sense at this time and is not a parental solution, but rather a system solution. Let me explain.

 

The system is overloaded with children and in many cases there are no reliable caregivers, thereby forcing the system to take on the voice of a parent. One of the system’s best options to fill this “parental voice” is therapy. Whether it is psychotherapy, play therapy, speech therapy, primal scream therapy or all of the above!  But what is the goal of such therapy?  Where does it go?  The standard answer is “to work out these issues” however “these issues” are defined.  In my career I've written many of these treatment plans and signed off on hundreds more.  The popular lines in the Individual Care Plan reads something like this:

 

BEHAVIOR:  child becomes easily angered and frustrated, fights with others, is defiant with authority figures

GOAL:  reduce angry outbursts from 10 times a day to less than 3 times per day

INTERVENTION:  individual outpatient psychotherapy

 

And then the plan goes on to outline timeframes, who is going to do what, when, how often, etc.  But we have to stop right here and ask an important question: If we are doing all these things in therapy, what in the world are the parents for?!  The system responds with a "yeah, well the parents may not X,Y,Z, and even if they do, the therapy is designed to support what the parents are doing!"  And to that I (Russell) say, "never kid a kidder!"  I know what the deal is.  And in most cases, the system is saying that because there is no parent doing the parenting and we (the therapists) assume the parental role of teaching, instructing, guiding both child and parent(s) if they will participate.  We operate as if we are the one best shot at being a guiding, structured, i.e., parental voice in that child's life...and for good reason...many times we are!   But this is not how life should be.  I am quick to say that the system, which is subject to its own transitions, e.g., therapist moves, maternity leaves, or decisions to change careers and go into real estate, is a weak substitute for positive, consistent parenting.  I know how the shelters, group homes and respite care facilities are staffed.  Well meaning, good people, with big hearts of compassion who care about the residents…for 8 to 10 hours a day for 5 days a week, maybe 6 days if there’s no one else to fill the shift.  They are generally minimally trained but usually supervised by a more educated individual…and this is the best case scenario...I don’t want to even talk about the worst!  These people come and go, impacting the moment with safety and basic needs, but having little vision for the life of the child because after all, next week the kids may be placed somewhere else or perhaps a better job opens up across town, or perhaps one is just flat burnt out and needs a change of vocational scenery.  The point is, this is in essence, trying to stop a hemorrhage with a Band-Aid!  While it sounds like I am bashing the system, I assure you that I am not.  I, of all people, recognize and know its strengths and weaknesses.  When there is no reasonable option available to provide stable, responsible and enduring care, the system is the best option.  However, when there is a reasonable option, the system should recognize its limitations in both practice and philosophy, back off and let parents do the parenting.  To bring it back to our children, we do not believe that introducing more “parental voices” to them is in their best interest, especially at this time.  It introduces “competing voices” and weakens or even interferes with, the bonding process between the children and us as their forever parents.

The second reason has to do with simple logistics.  To place the four children in these services at this time means anywhere from 10 to 20 hours a week of time spent either on the road or in an office somewhere.  This makes no sense to interrupt the children’s routine and structure in our home.  We have established a consistent routine with the children and they are responding positively to such structure.  We have noticed that any disruption in this routine, whether it’s a visitor, change in supper time or just doing something different, generates significant regression in behavior.  Let a social worker show up or a phone contact with a former social services worker, and it literally requires weeks of intense supervision to return the children to the previous higher levels of functioning.  To place the children in all of these services (1) limits our time with them developing bonding, and (2) disrupts routine and structure for the children.  It is hard to see that the potential benefits of therapy is going to be greater than us being with the children and providing a consistent, loving and predictable environment for them.  Again, if we saw that the potential benefits were greater than doing what we are currently doing, we would deal with that and certainly put the children in all these services.  However, we are not currently convinced of such benefits.

So, the battle for the future and welfare of our children continues.  It is intense and requires diligence, perseverance and patience.  We'd love to hear from some of our readers.  What are your thoughts?  Maybe some of you have had experiences.  What have those experiences been like for you?  Drop us a line in the comments section.  We have been greatly encouraged by many of you and your insights in the past.  We'd like to invite you to give us more!  Until we talk again...