Bet that gets a few bites. Seriously though, as grim and as horrible as these places mostly were, kids being kept there at least had some stability in that they came fairly quickly to know what to expect, and there were no ongoing upheavals in their lives.

The current foster-home situation is just as grim. DOCS complains that they cant get quality carers, then penalises those that they do have for doing too good ajob.

I know a couple of foster mums and they consistently tell everyone that the kids are great (yes they often have problems, but thats to be expected), but that they spend more time jumping through hoops to prove themselves to the system, than looking after the kids.

One great foster mum has just had enough. She has had two girls taken away from her because she got too emotionally involved - she had their pictures on the wall in their lounge room. One of these girls is just 6, and the foster mum has had them on a long-term basis, including nursing their older brother through a terminal illness (he went home to his own parents for a while, but they beat him for throwing up - caused by his medication). She wasnt even allowed to say goodbye - the girls were taken from their school by docs. How can that not be damaging to the kids.

Another had a 3 yo aboriginal boy taken away from her because he "needed" to be with his own culture. She had had him since he was 4 weeks old. His room was filled with aboriginal art and books, and he had a bedspread made by his foster grandmother of the aboriginal flag. She hasnt been allowed to see him since he was taken away.

When I heard these stories I felt sick to my stomach. How had we allowed such as system to develop. A system that also allows children to starve to death in their own homes.

Hi country gal.

It saddened me to read the examples you provided in your post. It does seem ludicrous to remove a child who has been with a caring foster parent for a long time. What sort of emotional impact must this have on kids.

It is a catch-22 - the need to ensure foster parents are suitable without being too intrusive or overly dogmatic in style. From my understanding DOCS is terribly understaffed and they are struggling to keep on top of the ever growing cases of child abuse or neglect.

I would imagine the advantage foster care has over orphanages is the feeling of normalcy (ie. not standing out from other kids) and having the care and attention of one or two committed foster parents in a family situation.

This does not mean that workers in orphanages are not committed but that the institutionalisation, bureaucracy and ratio of staff to kids might be prohibitive. But then again a good orphanage would be a better option than a bad foster parent.

Country Gal ,

Bring back whatever works best for the children .

Foster homes with their dedicated carers must be supported .

Aboriginal Kids may need Aboriginal foster parents - from what I have seen many Aboriginal Parents are struggling with the care of the children of their own extended families.

Grandparents especially need support .

Schools must TEACH everyone responsible parenting - it seems to be a lost art . If you can't get the theory right stay back til you do .

It's a skill no society can afford to lose .

The problem with fostering is highlighted by one of the examples provided - that they are not allowed to become emotionally involved with the kids. To me this is utter rot! In the first example I gave the foster parents have young kids of their own, that still go to the same school as their foster siblings (at least they didnt take them out of town). How does it look to a young child if they are treated differently to their foster parents "own" children. It cant be emotionally healthy to be consistently reinforced that you are "different". The comment re orphanages was tongue-in-cheek, but at least there would be consistency.

I understand that DOCS is understaffed, but surely there are better things for them to do than to penalise foster parents who are "too" good. One of the examples I gave has now made the sad decision to give up fostering, as she finds the mental trauma inflicted on her and the kids from DOCS to be too much. That's a sad day for the welfare of the kids of this country.

Country Girl

You can't be serious! Look at the Care Leavers of Australia Network (CLAN) survey of 291 care leavers' experiences in orphanages. 43% reported they were sexually molested, 44% reported they were placed in solitary confinement , another 36% said they were locked in a cupboard. Almost all reported they were physically assaulted. 28% reported they had only primary level schooling or none at all; more than half left school without an educational certificate at all.

If you want to see the lifetime consequences of this abuse in adult life, read the survey report or the Senate Report Forgotten Australians

http://www.clan.org.au/pages/CLAN_Survey_results_in_brief.pdf
http://www.aph.gov.au/Senate/committee/clac_ctte/completed_inquiries/2004-07/inst_care/report/report.pdf

As for your claim that "kids being kept there [orphanages] at least had some stability in that they came fairly quickly to know what to expect, and there were no ongoing upheavals in their lives", you could say the same for Guantanamo Bay.

I don't disagree that the current foster-home situation is grim. The stories you tell are horrific. But surely you can't argue that the only alternative is to turn the clock back to orphanages where we know the damage was systemic.

pelican is right to argue that "...a good orphanage would be a better option than a bad foster parent", but the chances of getting a good foster parents are much higher than getting a good orphanage. And do the maths. 200 kids in one bad orphanage versus 200 bad foster families?

The chances of reforming the foster care system are infinitely better than reforming the orphanage system.

My primary school bordered, in 1940 odd, an orphanage.
They were an isolated bunch. I walked to school past the entrance, set in a formidable fence, often I was joined by one or other of the inmates .
I gathered, as a child, it wasn't the happiest of places! Strict rules, and chores allocated often as punishment, saw to that.
The freedom I enjoyed, while I often thought unfairly critisised, being put "in there" was as a dire threat, my mother would make not infrequently.

As the inmates already felt "left out" it was no wonder the threat made me tremble. Strict as was my mother strict had another dimension in "there".
Being "left out" when an adult is just debilitating, as a child it's
just unacceptable!
Why were they there? Mostly it was threatend or real violence in the home.
In the early 40's society was still recovering from the depression add to that there was a war. Men absconded marriage and family by "joining up" nodoubt a period when family was under real threat.
INMO we under no such threat today! but expectations are much higher!
We are better to do more about the expectations?
I had friends in "posh" schools, thats separation too, but of a different kind. It's perhaps too much to have expected kids today to have lost there "superiority/ inferiority" complexes.
Boarding schools are being introduced for aboriginals, why not for
neglected children per see! "early experience" teachers trained correctly, handle race discrimination easier too. "form mothers" Are good idea too.

That "threat" perhaps still has a measure?

fluff4