This is based on the foster parents I know or have met...absolutely. Even if they stay in foster care until they are 18 they are much better off then with their natural parent/parents. I think their parents should be given the chance to clean up their act but if they can't their rights should be terminated.

 

Are there enough foster parents?

Are there enough foster parents?

 

That's the million dollar question. It all depends on the number of childern being removed. In our area (Henderson Co, Union Co, Webster Co.) there usually isn't much of a problem finding a home to take a kid when they have been removed. Now if you have an area where the social workers remove kids because of the slightest thing then you could definitely run short on homes.

I'm dealing in reality. I do not agree that they cannot support their children if they smoke weed. So, again, if they are smoking weed and the children are being fed do you advocate taking away the money which will cause the child to end up as a foster child or a ward of the state? Simple question.

 

Absolutely. If they're using our tax dollars for it, they have to pay the consequences. If you or I were doing it, that's completely different. We aren't living off other people's hard work.

Absolutely. If they're using our tax dollars for it, they have to pay the consequences. If you or I were doing it, that's completely different. We aren't living off other people's hard work.

 

If you remove the children because of that, then the children will be forced to live off of "other people's hard work" also. I see what you're saying, but wouldn't your stance increase the number of people who are eligible to receive benefits?

Absolutely. If they're using our tax dollars for it, they have to pay the consequences. If you or I were doing it, that's completely different. We aren't living off other people's hard work.

 

What if Dad is drunk and receiving food stamps? Take the child?

I've got to ask the question: Where will the cost end?

 

Cost of drug testing added to heavy state budget and tax burden.

 

Cost of administration staff who will police it. Their salaries can't be cheap. Add that to the budget.

 

Cost of Foster/Emergency care for more children placed in those circumstances than are presently there. (Note I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, just costly) Add that to the budget.

 

Cost of court hearings on these matters. (Court time will be a premium) Add that to the budget.

 

Many will turn to crime and more will feel a "need" to do so. So police budgets and employees need to be added because their will probably be at least a spike in that. Add that to the budget.

 

 

Subtract the welfare funds that are paid.

 

Does it really balance the books or grow the deficit? :idunno:

What if Dad is drunk and receiving food stamps? Take the child?

 

Absolutely. If that's the only way to get these losers to stop abusing the handouts their given, then absolutely. The kids are probably better off without the drunk or drug-addicted parents anyways.

Absolutely. If that's the only way to get these losers to stop abusing the handouts their given, then absolutely. The kids are probably better off without the drunk or drug-addicted parents anyways.

 

What if their BA is .07?

What if their BA is .07?

 

Last time I checked, .07 isn't drunk.

 

And I'm saying the dad is a drunk, not that he's drunk on one particular instance.

Last time I checked, .07 isn't drunk.

 

And I'm saying the dad is a drunk, not that he's drunk on one particular instance.

 

So does one failed drug test = "addict" or do we need to see a pattern ie "dad is a drunk?"

So does one failed drug test = "addict" or do we need to see a pattern ie "dad is a drunk?"

 

Can't compare the two. It's not illegal to be drunk. It's against the law to do drugs.

Can't compare the two. It's not illegal to be drunk. It's against the law to do drugs.

 

So it's not a matter of "what's good for the child" with you but ,rather, a matter of following the law?

So it's not a matter of "what's good for the child" with you but ,rather, a matter of following the law?

 

That's not what I'm saying at all. You can't compare doing something that is legal to do to something that is illegal. If the person is a drunk, they shouldn't have their kids. I've already said as much. Not sure what you're looking for.

I've got to ask the question: Where will the cost end?

 

Cost of drug testing added to heavy state budget and tax burden.

 

Cost of administration staff who will police it. Their salaries can't be cheap. Add that to the budget.

 

Cost of Foster/Emergency care for more children placed in those circumstances than are presently there. (Note I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, just costly) Add that to the budget.

 

Cost of court hearings on these matters. (Court time will be a premium) Add that to the budget.

 

Many will turn to crime and more will feel a "need" to do so. So police budgets and employees need to be added because their will probably be at least a spike in that. Add that to the budget.

 

 

Subtract the welfare funds that are paid.

 

Does it really balance the books or grow the deficit? :idunno:

 

Short term no, long term you might be able to raise more children no dependent on wel fare because they aren't exposed to such horrible realities as drugged out parents as children.

For those interested in the state of KY foster parents receive $22.70/day for kids 11 and under and $24.70/day for kids over 11. This is for normal kids...foster parents that take in kids that are classified as special needs get more.