This week, someone asked the question, “Why not just provide the cost for medical care in country and let children stay with the foster families who love them?” Since I had pondered this as well, I thought I’d share my response:
Both of our daughters are from foster homes that at least the littlest one does not want to leave. If it were just the medical issues, then I agree that it would be better to allow them to stay with those they love. But there are other things to consider.
Often children are returned to the orphanage later in life for various reasons - including changes in the foster family, cost of schooling them, etc. , which makes it very difficult for them to find families. In our one daughter's case, she is a likely candidate for a syndrome that presents degenerative illness
later in life - and that diagnosis is likely why many have overlooked her file. Foster families may be surprised when an otherwise healthy looking child begins to develop problems they didn't anticipate - or can't cope with - and the child may be returned to the orphanage.
Most importantly in my mind, is the ongoing view of orphans in society. "Luck" is a prevailing virtue to many, and an orphan is considered "unlucky" - not someone you'd welcome as an inlaw or worker. With competition for work fierce, visually disabled children will be less likely to make the cut - making their
future dim. While their foster families may love them, the child will eventually have to make their own way - and there are few opportunities without good schooling and connections.
Last but not least -my youngest daughter came from a foster family who took good care of her. She knew, however, that she was not on the same footing as their biological children. She has never looked back. I don't think this will be the case with our newest daughters - but it is true nonetheless. They have no legal protection, family name, or standing as joint heirs - theirs is a precarious existence dependent on the goodwill and continued health of their benefactors.
We know they will not see it this way - and expect they will grieve deeply. In this current reality, however, it is the best for them and their futures.
Blessings, Kim
He predestined us for adoption as sons through Jesus Christ, according to the purpose of his will...
Ephesians 1:5
Kim,
ReplyDeleteThat is a great explanation. Unlucky is just how these precious kids are viewed. But on the other side of that big blue ocean are families that are hoping and praying to be the lucky family to be blessed by calling one of these children their own.
Ever once in a while I get some obscure questions that render me somewhat speechless. And for me that is shocking :) I always think about the answer so I am ready next time:)
Nicole
I agree, Nicole! These little ones are hidden treasures just waiting to be found - I never get over how lucky we are to be blessed with them. :)
ReplyDeleteWell said friend.
ReplyDeleteAlso, many, many times, the foster families are either not allowed to adopt their foster children or just decline to do so. Adoption in most cases is the best thing for the future of these kiddos. Like it or not, most of the time, their futures are much better here.
ReplyDeleteThis is a great explanation Kim! None of our 5 were ever in foster care (maybe Raegan briefly as a smaller infant) so I've not had to consider much what questions people may have about removing a child who, for the moment, "seems" happily placed in a foster family. I can now see how adopting a child in an orphanage vs a foster home could raise different questions...good to read a great answer should we ever be in that situation!! :)
ReplyDeleteBlessings, Jennifer