Fortunately for me, my dad is an attorney. This means that he knew how to do a little research on the judge on CD's case. He was able to send me some of the decisions he authored in which he terminated parental rights when the decisions were appealed. Another attorney friend told me that he found, in his research, that every single determination for termination that this judge made has been affirmed at appeal. What this means, is that at least he does it the way other judges like it done. The other judges find him very thorough.
From reading the decisions I learned quite a bit. For example, I have been very concerned about how prolonged this has all been and what it would be like for a two year old, now securely attached to our family, to be taken after a year and a half or potentially longer to start over and develop an attachment to her biological mother whom she has seen 6 times in 12 months. In fact, just the other day, the case worker criticized the System as she believes that this doesn't even seem to matter in the decisions of the judges.
Front and center in our judge's decision were the results of a bonding evaluation. In the evaluation, because the biological mother took 15 months to complete her MICA program, she had lost her bond with her twin toddlers. The expert advising the court, after assessing the relationships between the twins and their foster parents as well as their relationships with their bio mother, explained that the foster parents had become the "psychological parents" of the children. The expert argued that removal from their psychological parents (foster parents who wanted to adopt them) would cause more harm to the children than losing their bio mother.
The decision was filled with information from experts, he did not rely on any one mental health professional. He did not rely on the findings of any one program therapist or case manager. He didn't come to the termination decision until two years into the case but when he did, he left no room for a court of appeals to find fault with his ruling.
So I learned that this judge has done this before. His decisions stand up in a court of appeals every time. He cares about the prolonged absence of a biological parent from a young child's life. He appreciates the harm it could do to remove a child from his or her psychological family and does not feel that biology always trumps psychology when it comes to what makes a "family."
It looks like we can expect another year if not years before anything is resolved. However, I now have at least some confidence that from a legal sense, our judge knows how to make a decision that will stand. He will also not do what many of us feel is done to kids in foster care. He will not simply treat them as the property of the biological parent. I can have confidence that in his decision making process he will consider what is in the best interest of CD.
6 comments:
It looks great for your case. Our State is absolutely horrible when it comes to the emotional needs of the child. Our neice was placed with us at the age of 15 months and came to us with bonding issues due to the lack of interaction from her dad (my brother) and her bio mom. So, she was with us from 15 months until 3 months before her 3rd birthday when the State decided to just take her and place her with a foster adopt family who had 3 little boys. She had bonded with everyone in our family during that time. The State said my husband had a felony on his record from 1982 which was NOT true. There was a very corrupt Judge on the case. The foster family was lied to and heartbroken when they found out they were lied to and told the parental rights had already been terminated. They had been through a big fight prior to Ariel being placed with them over a little boy who they finally adopted. The family had no idea at first what the situation was with Ariel and fighting for her. The VGAL quit because he was told to change his favorable report he wrote to the court on behalf of Ariel coming back home to us. It was a long heartbreaking 10 month battle but with the help of many people including a Senator and the Director of the Ombudsman, she finally came back home to us. We are only the 3rd family in our State to prevail and get a relative`s child back. She is not the same happy little girl she was when she was taken from us. It`s getting better but she has the fear that someone will take her from us again. At the same time our case was going on, there was a foster family fighting to keep a 4 year old they`d had since birth. We had the same Judge. In that case, the foster parents lost and the child went back to parents who had 2 infants die in their care. You can look that up. Look up Amy Langley and "Poca" in Wa. State. The story is horrifying and so is the way our State works. It sounds like you have a good and fair Judge. I am praying you prevail and soon.
What a complicated an awful story.
And,it never should have happened. If all within the system would just take into consideration what truly is in the best interest of the child, things would work very well. It should be about the kids and not the parents, relatives or foster family. The true parents are whoever has loved and cared for the child. Not that you don`t already know this. CD`s bio mom loves her I`m sure but the lack of visits says a lot. We were only allowed 2 visits with Ariel after she was taken and the 2nd visit, she clung to me crying, saying over and over she would be good if she could come home. She was still 2. I would`ve given anything to have even a monthly visit with her. It`s obvious CD`s bio mom doesn`t have the bond or she would cherish every minute allowed with her. I am hoping she decides to do what`s best for CD. In our case,we have an open adoption with Ariel`s bio mom but it`s obvious now that she was using the State for her bus passes and such through the ordeal. Once Ariel was back in our care and adoption paperwork was signed by the parents, visits completely stopped (their choice). The adoption has been final since June 21, 2010 and there`s been no contact from them at all. It`s sad. I would`ve liked for Ariel to know them and have somewhat of a relationship with them but at this point, it would be detrimental to her as there would be no consistency. I may have missed the answer to this in your blog but when will you find out anything else?
There really is no answer. It was a yr yesterday. The judge at the one yr mark, the permanency hearing, gave the mom 3 to 6 months to work toward reunification. She was gone for 10 months, compliant for a little over one and disappeared since July hit. We know we are her preadoptive home if the mom cannot get her act together in the time the judge allows. What" act together" would minimally mean and how long the judge will continue to extend is really up to him. From the looks of his decisions, this could go one another year and then some.
It sounds hopeful that the judge is careful and is not likely to make a decision that can be overturned. Although the long drawn process will be difficult for you, has some risk for CD (perhaps minimal due to her age preventing from understanding), at least for the next few months you can know that CD is happily with you.
If he is able to understand that preserving the "psychological parents" place in a child's life is important and he will work in the best interest of CD, then my guess is that in the long run, you'll be fine.
That judge sounds good. Hope he stays on the case.
Post a Comment