The first time, a friend in Utah called and said she was afraid her 18 year old would run away and was anorexic, could she stay with us for a while. We had known “L” since she was 5 years old and said certainly. With us, the crisis passed, she became a library page in our town, ultimately went home, and is now a librarian with a masters – she was with us about a year and a half. Since that time, younglings known to us have come and stayed anywhere from six months to two years, in order to launch. Some had a parent die, or a parents move away, or serve over seas, or the young adult was sober, and the parent not sober. The kids were not criminals, not “in trouble”, but were homeless or at risk for various reasons.
With modest supports [I admit, I was the one who rounded up “supports” for myself and these young adults that I really do think of as “birdlings” though some are a foot taller than I am] experienced parents could assist this age group. We do. Such a program could literally save lives and be extremely cost effective.
I note residential programs these days come in at about $150,000 a year – or more. My household fostering young adults costs the Commonwealth nothing. I suggest that at a modest cost, perhaps support groups or an “on call” LICSW, others could perform this function and share their experience and ability to nurture those young adults who would otherwise fall through the cracks in our society, as so many are doing.
Further Reading:
DCF Fears Kids Will Be Cut Loose
http://news.bostonherald.com/n…
Broken System Keeps Mom, Daughter Apart
http://news.bostonherald.com/n…
Legal Orphans in Free Fall
Mental health treatment – in lockup
can apply for voluntary services at the age of 18 as opposed to aging out of the system. However, most have such a negative opinion of DCF that they refuse much needed support when the come of age, so to speak. Your proposal would be ideal, but it’s not realistic. The majority of the children who age out of the system often have a plethora of issues that can not be easily addressed. Very few age out without having some issue that affects their ability to function in a family setting. So while I agree with your proposal on paper, I just don’t think it can be done. I do think more focus should be on providing those youth with a permanent life long connection. There are a number of services that can be utilized to help youth explore possible connections so that they are not truly alone when they age out.
And the lengthy required contracts. Sign in is most likely to occur when there has been “continuity of care” – i.e. the same social worker for many years. But we can talk – my proposal, like all proposals, would work for some and not others; this is not a forum for fleshing it out.
<
p>Of course long time, lifelong connections are what young people need, but the way termination of parental rights is pursued and the lack of support for visitation with the kinship system is a problem with how adolescent cases are currently managed. But at any event, the program I propose would help if enacted or put in place administratively. Where the population of aged out kids grows by 800+ a year, even if 150-200 kids were served this way, this would be very good for all involved. Properly done, this works.
<
p>As to the issues, well of course I know about that. I did after all raise a dispraxic “autism rule out” first born, and dealt with 11 diagnosis for that kid alone. Experienced parents were not exactly born yesterday – we are in our 50s 0r 60s and have dealt with “a whole lot of living” ourselves.