Impacts of Placing Children in Foster Care
PLACING CHILDREN IN FOSTER CARE
All the children have a right to a better existence. It is the responsibility of the state to make sure that all the youngsters grow up in the best environment. Parents and guardians should always act as role models to their kids. Therefore, it is necessary to take away children from their homes and place them in the care of the state to guard them from exploitation and neglect from their parents. The new environment where they are placed would help influence their positive development.
Potential ethical issues
Protection of confidence: when implementing the new strategy many times the confidence among the two parties might be violated. There may be situations in which the information raised in a secret conversation with the child can be breached. In the circumstances of child abuse an individual may take the responsibility of sharing the information with other people in order to guard the child (Barber, 2004). One might decide to share the issue with another expert like the boss, and the child protection guide. Breaching the kids’ privacy might be a violation of the law, however, when the child makes a revelation of the abuse or the problems they are facing then one should be worried that the child is in danger of harm. The violation of the child’s privacy can be very essential at this point since the kid might be suffering from the offenses done by their parents or guiders. Therefore, the only way to make certain that the problem is addressed and the child is taken good care off is through reporting of the matter. Through the raising of the concern the youngster’s privacy would have been violated but for the benefits of the child.
Conflict of interest: a conflict of attention entails the real mistreatments or the possibility of abuse of the faith that people have on other or experts. It is a state of affairs in which other individual considerations have the possibility to negotiate on the judgment and impartiality. The conflict of interest occurs when a person, for instance the parent or guardian believes that the expert ruling is probable to be cooperation (Bloom, 2010). The liable person might only think that the judgment made concerning the abuse of the child is a biased one. He or she might always want a consideration to be made and negotiations to be included in the procedures where they can be allowed to take back the child. They believe that the involved parties could easily be compromised into making a decision that best suits them.
Unnecessary family division: when a home has many reported cases of mistreatments and child abuse the policy allows for separation. The child will be taken away from the family and they might be taken by a foster care service. They might be taken, it until when the offenders have been proven to be free of the charges they are facing (Pine, 2007). The taking away of the affected youngster is of great importance in enhancing the individuals’ growth. In addition, taking away the children from the residence helps to decrease the extent that the kid is uncovered to such violence. By this means, the technique will assist in reducing hostility in the young person.
Representation for clients with reduced cognitive ability: during the implementation of the strategy measures should be kept in place to ensure that full representation is applied. The entire individual involved in the case should be signified in the judgment. Those customers who cannot speak for themselves should be symbolized by relative or legal experts (Zlotnick, 2013). There should be an expert who must be in a position to prove their client’s capability and if possible they should present some legal documents. When the children are very young to provide the details of the incident, then they require an expert or another person to represent them. Parents or guiders might also need a representative if they are mentally challenged or when they are not in the right state to represent them. With the proper representation, then the correct judgment that would be beneficial to the child can be achieved.
Reduced juvenile offenses: the implementation of the policy will place a major role in decreasing youth crimes. By taking out the children from violent homes to the institutions where they can be brought up properly helps in enhancing their positive growth. The new environment where there are not incidences of mistreatments and all other forms of abuse make them less aggressive and hospitable. Therefore, when the youngsters are well brought up they would learn to stay away from criminal activities (Wilgocki, 2002). This development most likely to be reflected in the future when they become adults. Since the youngsters will be well brought up, then there can be no cases of crimes in the society in the prospect.
Good child growth: the children, who are brought up in homes with domestic aggression and where that parents abuse alcohol or other drugs have a bad growth. They tend to have a negative development where they adopt their parents or guardian behaviors. However, when the youngsters are removed from those houses they associate with other children and populaces. Through the process of interaction they learn and acquire good behaviors which positively impact of their developments.
One, the unexceptional cost to the taxpayers: when the society starts to remove the youngsters from their houses and placing the complete load of raising them to the government. Only because an individual in the residence had drug charge and a domestic violence crime, the government would rapidly run out of areas to house the children. The state would be left with no other option rather than to raise the price of taxpayers in order to sustain the children and to house them.
Two, putting the kids in an overcrowded situation that might happen from the execution of this rule would do more damage to the children than good. Not all adolescents that are placed in advanced care are there owing to awful parenting. Some of these children end up in that place since their parents could no longer manage their actions (Pine, 2007). All parents or guardians who misplace their kids might not have similar amounts of crime. With this the children from improved environment run the danger of being skilled via a similar social theory actions and violence from the other children. Because people and their performances, they take are resulted from the information increased from watching others and life experiences.
Three, the complete disentanglement of the family unit: the children that are placed in these circumstances would mature with a reduced sense of family belongings and worth. The reduced sense of family is because more kids could be taken away under this rule than they could have wished to be located as districts of the state. Many could have wanted to be located with those children from their regions whose relatives would have loved and taken better care.
According to Bloom (2010), the Texas further care change plan, notes that when youngsters attain 18 years they are denied government assistance. In addition, they also lack the support schemes to rely on. This frequently pushes them into the criminal justice scheme, since they do not get sufficient education while in the organization to be able to purpose separately. The majority of them have mental and emotional issues yet they are freed into the world to find themselves. They have difficult moments not submitting to poverty, homelessness, criminalization, unwanted pregnancies and illnesses. The impacts of persons engaged in these circumstances are big. Criminals might have to get time out of job to finish all the agendas that could be needed. The kids of otherwise caring parents removed from them and propelled to odd settings getting mental challenges along the way from being shifted to diverse areas (Barber, 2004). They could also get a negative sense of personality value. The court schemes would be very packed than they previously are sourcing extra taxpayer’s cash to be used on more workers. Therefore, considering the above scenarios, this rule should be deemed as ethical. Because there are many dangers of revolving a partially bad state into a much inferior circumstance for the child concerned. The department misinterpreted the theory since it botched to take into thought that some youngsters learn bad behavior and violence other sources beside their parents.
Barber, James G., and Paul H. Delfabbro. (2004) . Children in foster care. Routledge
Bloom, Debra. (2010). Foster care. Green haven Press
Pine, Jeune, and Suzanne McCall. (2007) Understanding looked after children an introduction to psychology for foster care. Jessica Kingsley
Wilgocki, Jennifer, and Marcia Kahn Wright. (2002). Maybe days: a book for children in foster care. Magination Press
Zlotnick, Cheryl. (2013). Children living in transition helping homeless and foster care children and families. Columbia University Press