Is our government guilty of poor childcare welfare

miec

Hi

I can across this article today, in relation to children placed in care homes: http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0527/amnesty.html


Basically this has been an ongoing problem in this country and despite having unprecedented wealth (now all gone) nothing was done for vulnerable children. I personally agree with the article by Amnesty. Do you agree or disagree?

looksee

I do not have any first hand knowledge of children in care, so I do not know how the system fails them. I don't doubt that there are flaws in the system, and inevitably children will suffer for that.

There is no justification for putting children in an adult mental institution, though 'children' implies maybe under 10s, and in fact they could be 16 or 17. That does not make it right, but it is a rather different picture.

Also it needs to be remembered that many of these children will have come from backgrounds that make them both vulnerable and also difficult to help. I entirely agree that they need to be cared for, and the state has an obligation to them, but again, some of these children are in their mid teens, and short of locking them up it is no easier for the state agencies to keep track of them than it is for some parents.

No doubt there are things that could be improved, the same is true of hospitals, nursing homes, education; any state or even private agency that deals with vulnerable people has flaws.

We have a responsibility, through the government we elect, to protect children and vulnerable adults, but it would be most useful to find out where and what the problems are rather than just latching on to the latest 'scandal' and demanding retribution.

Given a choice between a government that proposed to improve social care and one that promised tax cuts, I wonder which would be voted in.

Giselle

looksee wrote: »

Also it needs to be remembered that many of these children will have come from backgrounds that make them both vulnerable and also difficult to help. I entirely agree that they need to be cared for, and the state has an obligation to them, but again, some of these children are in their mid teens, and short of locking them up it is no easier for the state agencies to keep track of them than it is for some parents.

I'm shocked at the number of younger children that have died while in care, I would have assumed that the vast majority would have been older teens.

From todays Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0530/breaking14.html

Of the total 37 deaths, 20 were teenagers and 17 were younger children.

Younger than 13 years old!

Something is very rotten within the State care system and its a scandal we should all be disgusted about as the state acts to care for the vulnerable on our behalf.

caseyann

I heard on the news today,that hundreds of children in child care have not been visited by a social worker in over ten years!!!
If thats not an ultimate failure on our states part among the other things that have came to light, i dont know what is.How do they know these children are not been hurt or in the best possible place for them if they are not checking up on them?

miec

miec wrote: »

Hi

I can across this article today, in relation to children placed in care homes: http://www.rte.ie/news/2010/0527/amnesty.html

Basically this has been an ongoing problem in this country and despite having unprecedented wealth (now all gone) nothing was done for vulnerable children. I personally agree with the article by Amnesty. Do you agree or disagree?

Unprecedented wealth which considering the state of all services wasn't enough. I'm not excusing their policies, but somehow I doubt this country has the income to cover a program that would be extensive enough to satisfy. Are we better or worse than countries like Iceland, or similar small countries with limited income? Is the problem that the institutions that are involved in these area's are forced to stretch their resources thin covering all areas?

just curious whether if the institutions problems are policy or resource related?

As for the article by Amnesty, they've traditionally made all these observations with very little in the form of constructive criticism. There is a tendency to demand changes to systems without evaluating the practical concerns such as financing, premises, labor etc.

CDfm

We never had unprecidented wealth as is implied we had a property boom where the properties were overvalued. A huge difference.

You have always had issues with child mortality. Children also die thru illness -leukemia etc,some commit suicide.

I don't know who said it but the phrase "I wish I could save them all springs to mind".

You have always had kids running away from home. You have always had badboys (& badgirls). You have teenagers and young adults who commit crime, take drugs and even rape rob and murder. That happens when they are in their parents care and a visit to the childrens court in Smithfield would disabuse a lot of do gooders of the notion that it is any different.

Should we lock them all up? Keep them in secure units until they are 18 and the stats will look great. Organise curfews and manhunts for those that escape.Is that what amnesty wants or should we sedate them or bring back lobotomies or EST.

Not all casualties are preventable. Those who think that is so usually accompany this with "somebody (else) should do somethiing" and "national scandal" and "government" usually follow.

I dont think they are preventable because young people will always be young people.

I am not unsympathetic to the issue but the implication that the deaths were preventable is all very well in hindsight. Its like a mother in court saying to a judge about her child ,I dont want you to take him or her into custody but I can no longer control them.Its unrealistic to say that a child taken into care is controllable either.

Giselle

CDfm wrote: »

Should we lock them all up? Keep them in secure units until they are 18 and the stats will look great. Organise curfews and manhunts for those that escape.Is that what amnesty wants or should we sedate them or bring back lobotomies or EST.

Not all casualties are preventable. Those who think that is so usually accompany this with "somebody (else) should do somethiing" and "national scandal" and "government" usually follow.

Well that all sounds great and to a big extent its right. Young people will behave like young people and feral youths are hard to control no matter if they're in there parents care of the care of the State.

But this is the sort of haphazard care that the State is providing.

THE HSE abandoned a boy of 16 in an internet cafe on Tuesday night because it had no place to put him.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_8002/is_2010_March_12/ai_n52447025/

Its not good enough.

Its not a case that the State is doing the best it can, and the kids just find a way to kill themselves or get themselves killed.

The services are inadequate, and just because the kids are troubled and challenging doesn't mean the services shouldn't bother trying harder.

CDfm

Giselle wrote: »

Well that all sounds great and to a big extent its right. Young people will behave like young people and feral youths are hard to control no matter if they're in there parents care of the care of the State.

But this is the sort of haphazard care that the State is providing.

Eh -the state can do no more and in some cases less than the parents. I heard the foster Mum of a teenage girl I know say she threw a party when the girl moved out. I knew the girls late Dad. I agreed with the foster Mum.

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_8002/is_2010_March_12/ai_n52447025/

Its not good enough.

Its not a case that the State is doing the best it can, and the kids just find a way to kill themselves or get themselves killed.

The services are inadequate, and just because the kids are troubled and challenging doesn't mean the services shouldn't bother trying harder.

Have you ever had contact with our Social Services system. I dont mean to sound harsh but I was a volunteer with a group involved in family break up issues and many of the Social Workers themselves lack the life skills to deal with their client groups.

You put middle class girl graduates in to do a job that should be done by an experienced probation officer or even a bouncer. I often wondered what planet these women occupied (because its mostly women who are social workers) but its a 9 to 5 job and its well paid.Because a person is a caring person does not make them an effective social worker.

There were a few suicides among the groups I knew and I wont post any details but my own opinion was that the Social Workers were completely out of their depth to the point of being dangerously incompetant.

So its not the government thats to blame really its individual Social Workers who clock in and out.

In family law matters, as any man who has been thru the system will tell you,they are a disaster.

Its like when we had clerical abuse enquiries , the civil servants did nothing and got away with it , this is the same and its the indivdual social workers failure to do the right thing. The right thing is often the most difficult option and thats what they are there for..

Ickle Magoo

So, if the social workers are inept who is making a balls of hiring suitable staff capable of doing the job? I don't know how the social workers can be blamed for their own appointment...

CDfm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

So, if the social workers are inept who is making a balls of hiring suitable staff capable of doing the job? I don't know how the social workers can be blamed for their own appointment...

How are you doing Ickle and its a fair question.

We have an image of social workers a bit like Olivia Benson in law and order SVU. Its not the case. What are you going to do -fire the existing ones.

In government politicians rely on Civil Servants as the experts to impliment policy. It is the Civil Servants who ultimately are the decision makers and the politicians vote on budgets.

Social Workers cant be blamed for their appointment but they lack accountability and its this lack of individual accountability and responsiblity which is a huge problem.

On one suicide I know of and knew the client family the inquest has been adjourned for 8 years. That cant be right.

Ickle Magoo

Hiya CDfm,

Well, I don't watch Law & Order so I have no idea who olivia whatever is, far less base an opinion on Irish social workers on her, however my question was in relation to your

CDfm wrote:

many of the Social Workers themselves lack the life skills to deal with their client groups

CDfm wrote:

its not the government thats to blame really its individual Social Workers who clock in and out

Added to the not even gently cloaked accusation that these were a single gender of graduates just out for money, a la

CDfm wrote:

I often wondered what planet these women occupied (because its mostly women who are social workers) but its a 9 to 5 job and its well paid

Now, I don't have very much experience with Irish social workers, my question was based on your accusation, you appear to be hell bent on blaming female graduate money grabbers for being at fault for being less than effective social workers. Now, unless they are hiring themselves then it's not

really its individual Social Workers who clock in and out

fault, is it? It's whoever hires, trains and manages social workers - most probably in combination with whatever resources and legislation they must work within? Again, not of their making.

Giselle

CDfm wrote: »

Eh -the state can do no more and in some cases less than the parents. I heard the foster Mum of a teenage girl I know say she threw a party when the girl moved out. I knew the girls late Dad. I agreed with the foster Mum.



Have you ever had contact with our Social Services system. I dont mean to sound harsh but I was a volunteer with a group involved in family break up issues and many of the Social Workers themselves lack the life skills to deal with their client groups.

You put middle class girl graduates in to do a job that should be done by an experienced probation officer or even a bouncer. I often wondered what planet these women occupied (because its mostly women who are social workers) but its a 9 to 5 job and its well paid.Because a person is a caring person does not make them an effective social worker.

There were a few suicides among the groups I knew and I wont post any details but my own opinion was that the Social Workers were completely out of their depth to the point of being dangerously incompetant.

So its not the government thats to blame really its individual Social Workers who clock in and out.

In family law matters, as any man who has been thru the system will tell you,they are a disaster.

Its like when we had clerical abuse enquiries , the civil servants did nothing and got away with it , this is the same and its the indivdual social workers failure to do the right thing. The right thing is often the most difficult option and thats what they are there for..

If the State can do no more than the parents then the kids shouldn't be put in care in the first place.

There seems to be a familiar theme to your post, one I think is pointless to try to address.

CDfm

Ickle Magoo wrote: »

Now, I don't have very much experience with Irish social workers, my question was based on your accusation, you appear to be hell bent on blaming female graduate money grabbers for being at fault for being less than effective social workers. .

I know the comment is non PC and its going back to the era when a job in the bank was a safe option. I am saying its an occupation and not a vocation. So I am not blaming them for looking for well paid jobs. Nor can you blame the government for voting in a budget to suit a political objective of being seen to get something done.That is the system.

Not being the most pc person on earth I call it as I see it. One of the suicides was a 16 year old girl (and the other a woman in her 30s) and I felt the caseworker did not have the skills. A mature working class woman with life experience would have been a better fit IMHO.

I know I have a particular bias against social workers in the family law system but a child can live where they want when they reach 16 so I dont think I am unfair about recognising the constraints the work under.

Oh and Olivia Benson is the best detective ever,

Giselle wrote: »

If the State can do no more than the parents then the kids shouldn't be put in care in the first place.

There seems to be a familiar theme to your post, one I think is pointless to try to address.

I dont know that the state can do a better job than the parents. It may be that they can put shelter and provide for their needs.Really I think it is very hard to get a balance and a child may be neglected or in danger from the parents pr a danger to others.

I am not sure that all deaths are avoidable or it is the states fault.So the question for me is can the care or service delivery be more effective and how do you tighten up social worker accountability when they are in the wrong.

Ickle Magoo

CDfm wrote: »

I know the comment is non PC and its going back to the era when a job in the bank was a safe option. I am saying its an occupation and not a vocation. So I am not blaming them for looking for well paid jobs. Nor can you blame the government for voting in a budget to suit a political objective of being seen to get something done.That is the system.

Not being the most pc person on earth I call it as I see it. One of the suicides was a 16 year old girl (and the other a woman in her 30s) and I felt the caseworker did not have the skills. A mature working class woman with life experience would have been a better fit IMHO.

At the risk of repeating myself....if the caseworker did not have the skills, then who gave her the case? YOU are laying the blame solely at the feet of the social workers and calling them money-grabbing female graduates - my point was even if everything you say about how the social workers operate is correct, to suggest it's the fault of money-grabbing newly qualified women and not the fault of the people who manage, legislate and run the social work system, is just misogynistic nonsense.

I have some experience of the social work system in the UK and if it's anything like that here, I can't imagine anyone gets into it purely for the money, for starters. Secondly, if someone requires a bouncer then that's not in the remit of a social worker regardless of experience or gender - if you want to go back to the days of physical intervention then the remit has to change from the top. The state is systematically failing youngsters on so many levels, I think concentrating on a personal grudge against a particular tier of that system and specifically on a particular gender, is not particularly helpful or relevant to this discussion.

CDfm

I can only call it on how I see it and I am not being misogynistic. The OP asked for an opinion and I have given mine.

As for the motivation for people entering the occupation -I dont know. I am just going by the ones I came across.

Mine is not the only experience where people felt social workers failed to act and if you remember the Dunne family where an undertaker notified the gardai of a family picking coffins for their daughters and the gardai criticised social workers for not acting straight away.

http://www.rte.ie/news/2007/0424/enniscorthy.html

Are there male social workers - I have never come across one and if they exist -then in what percentage. Social workers get trained in colleges and will enter the occupation with whatever biases they acquire there. If you can judge a solicitor or a doctor by professional standards then why not judge a social worker by standards.

To say I am being misogynist because I point to a gender imbalance and apparent youth of a service that I came across is a cop out as I gave an opinion and yes I feel that gender and lack of life experience is a factor on service delivery. You are suggesting therefore that we cant discuss the social work profession and its gender composition or that we cant criticise the office holder but the person who hired them or that I can only criticise the colleges that train them.

You have social workers who are qualified and who train in colleges beside solicitors and doctors and engineers who are all held accountable for their actions and professional standards and somehow social workers arent.

I think it is to abstract to blame government for how social work practice has developed. At some way individual social workers have to assume responsibility for their actions or inactions.So by saying who gave them the case you are saying they are not qualified or their qualifications do not give them the skills to judge. It should give them the skills to say if a more robust intervention is needed based on their professional competetance and if they cant then they should not be in the job.Simple as.

And no i do not have a grudge -I am thinking about 2 suicides I knew and believe may have been avoidable so I am talking about sevice delivery to people like them.Thats my concern and not gender or anything else and thinking any other way does not really work because delivery should put the client first..

Giselle

Giselle wrote: »

THE HSE abandoned a boy of 16 in an internet cafe on Tuesday night because it had no place to put him.

I've read all the responses after this and it seems like you've missed the point. You've missed the realism of the problems at hand. The HSE simply didn't have the resources available to provide care for this boy. Now, I don't know the details of this case, but it seems likely that they would have provided this boy some help in the case of contacts or work related rather than the pure abandonment.

But in any case, its a case of you're damned if you do, and damned if you don't. Keeping the boy would stretch their resources even further thereby reducing the capability of providing services to the existing numbers of children under their care. And then they would face more criticism for their lack of ability to provide an adequate service.

I can't imagine that such a decision would have been made easily for people who have decided to focus their lives with helping people directly. There must have been a myriad of reasons. But thats unlikely to matter to posters here. Its a matter of wanting to have your cake and eat it too.

Simply put we have a flawed system struggling to provide a decent service in the face of lessening resources. Resource cuts are likely to hit them first since they're not the most glamorous of the health service's sectors, and considering the state of the economy these cuts are most likely to continue.

So I ask all of you... Are your expectations of the HSE and its role with caring for children realistic?

CDfm

A child can leave home with parental consent at 16 and be taken into care until they are 18.

The HSE just cant place a 16 year old in care especially if they they are absent from home with the parents consent. Most kids 16 and older in foster care or placed with relatives are in voluntary care.

So some of the responsibility lies with the kid to take up the available options voluntarily.

My understanding is that a child under 18 can go to a garda station and ask to be taken into custody if they are homeless and some do.

Taking a 16 year old into care involves going to court and getting a court order and all parties including the child need legal representation.They can also fund B&B accomadation for emergencies or place a child with relatives if a relative can be found to take them and the child is prepared to go.

If a child is in need of care and protection and is unlikely to receive it at home, then the HSE must take them into care. This may happen for example, in the case of an orphan or an abandoned child.
In other cases where parents are unable to cope due to illness or other problems they may agree to their children being taken into the care of the HSE. This is known as voluntary care. In these cases while the HSE has care of the children it must consider the parents' wishes as to how the care is provided. The HSE is obliged to maintain these children for as long as their welfare requires it. At present there are over 5,000 children in care in Ireland; the majority of whom are in voluntary care.

The HSE does not have a choice in the matter BTW. The 16 year old does.

Giselle

Deleted User wrote: »

I've read all the responses after this and it seems like you've missed the point.

You're missing my point which is that of all the services that the State provides, resourses should be targetted at the most vulnerable in society. The old, the sick, the needy, and vulnerable children.

The fact that the kid was left in a cafe, with or without contact numbers means that the service isn't resourced properly. It should be. It should be a top priority.

Giselle

Giselle wrote: »

You're missing my point which is that of all the services that the State provides, resourses should be targetted at the most vulnerable in society. The old, the sick, the needy, and vulnerable children.

The fact that the kid was left in a cafe, with or without contact numbers means that the service isn't resourced properly. It should be. It should be a top priority.

In your eyes it should be a top priority. For others the requirement to have the best facilities, adequate hospital beds, drug subsidies for elderly people, well trained staff, cancer screening, medical research grants, etc etc etc.

The HSC is responsible for a rather large area all of which are demanding increasing amounts of resources both in Financial and human terms. This country has consistently cried out for better Health services across the board and the HSC is forced to allocate the resources assigned to them to the areas most important.

IF Ireland was a highly successful and rich country I might agree with you more. But the simple fact is that the HSC is having to resource a lot of departments with a shrinking budget.

So, I ask you. Are your demands realistic considering the demands on the HSC and the resources available to perform those requirements?

CDfm

Taking a 16 year old into state care needs either with their voluntary cooperation or a court order.

I am not a huge fan of social workers but they do have to follow the system and the boy is old enough to make the decision on the spot.

Legally, they have to take a 16 year old into care at their request. In an emergency a 16 year old can request help from the gardai or present himself at A&E. So he doesnt want to do that.Tough.

I dont know the facts and in this case if he is taken into care by the HSE it would be the equivalent of incarceration.If he refuses what is on offer he has some responsibility for his own situation.

Plenty of kids in the past left school at 14 and lived away from home and had jobs. A 16 year old is not a baby.

So is this the action they should have taken.?

Nevyn

We don't have the care system we should have as it as with education and health care left for the holy orders of the catholic church to run which is why we had industrial schools and orphanages and laundries.

The appalling record of children in care continues to day with a shoddy system which is grossly underfunded and responsibilities being passed around while children suffer.

CDfm

The Industrial Schools and Laundries have been closed since for like 40 years.So you do have an alternative system to the church in place.

By what level are the care facilities being underfunded and against what benchmark. What type of care are you proposing.

I am not a fan of Social Workers but, in this case, I do not see what options were open to them to take the teenager into care without his cooperation on that day.

Abby Sunderland is 16 and was sailing around the world on her own.

So what did social services do that was actually wrong and did they do anything illegal ie had he put himself into care.

johnnyskeleton

Giselle wrote: »

I'm shocked at the number of younger children that have died while in care, I would have assumed that the vast majority would have been older teens.

From todays Irish Times:
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2010/0530/breaking14.html

Younger than 13 years old!

Something is very rotten within the State care system and its a scandal we should all be disgusted about as the state acts to care for the vulnerable on our behalf.

How did they die, do you know?

Ickle Magoo

Second line of the article in the link says

As new figures revealed 18 children were killed, died from drugs or by suicide while in care in the past 10 years

CDfm

So 19 were from natural causes and the 18 were from unnatural ,drugs , suicide, misadventure or unlawful killing.

So how could these have been prevented - its fine to say more resourses but is this thru a US style 24 hour lockdown prison system.

What is the proposal?

Nevyn

CDfm wrote: »

The Industrial Schools and Laundries have been closed since for like 40 years.So you do have an alternative system to the church in place.

We don't we have a piecemeal system which does not cater for the numbers needed.

http://www.examiner.ie/ireland/no-replacement-beds-for-troubled-teens-120513.html

Monday, June 14, 2010 Previous editions

Ireland:Cloudy with occasional light shower, some sunny spells Cloudy with occasional light shower, som »
Share
No replacement beds for troubled teens

By Jennifer Hough

Saturday, May 22, 2010

NO replacement beds have been provided for troubled teenagers requiring secure care following the closure of the state’s main special care unit last year.


The news comes in light of strong criticism of the HSE following the deaths of teenagers David Foley, Tracey Fay and, most recently, Daniel McAnaspie, all of whom were in the care of the state.

It has now emerged that since the controversial closure of Ballydowd, no alternative special care places have been provided.

The 12-bed unit at Ballydowd was forced to shut down last year following a damning HIQA (Health Information and Quality Authority) inspection.

The HSE subsequently pledged the closure would not result in fewer places for vulnerable young people, however, no other service is yet in place.

Freda McKitterick, head of Barnardos’ guardian ad litem service, said the situation was unacceptable.

Ms McKitterick said there were now no places in Dublin, and this was causing a bottleneck for vulnerable young people requiring high-support care.

She said although the plan had been to transfer Ballydowd’s services to another unit, Crannog Nua, it was not yet up and running and closed to referrals.

Ms McKitterick said vulnerable children requiring specialised care were now being forced to remain in situations where it was known they are at high risk.

Documents obtained under the Freedom of Information Act also reveal at the time of Ballydowd’s closure there was concern about the move to Crannog Nua.

In a letter to Hugh Kane, assistance national director of the HSE, HIQA warned "unless the HSE ensures there is a rolling maintenance plan, as well as prompt repairs, the difficulties that have beset the building in Ballydowd could be repeated with the current building in Crannog Nua."

Ballydowd was forced to close after the publication of a highly critical HIQA report that found it was not an acceptable premises in which to detain children

There are now only nine high-support places nationwide to which trouble teenagers can be referred — four in Limerick, a mixed-bed unit, and five in Cork, all for girls.

Although when initially asked, the HSE said "due to the current industrial action this data is not currently available", after further questioning a spokesperson confirmed "we are currently in the process of replacing the 12 beds closed in Ballydowd".

CDfm wrote: »

By what level are the care facilities being underfunded and against what benchmark. What type of care are you proposing.

How about the very basic safe supervised place to live while a foster home is found and so they can finish school.

CDfm wrote: »

I am not a fan of Social Workers but, in this case, I do not see what options were open to them to take the teenager into care without his cooperation on that day.

Given that there are no safe and secure places and they are left over night in garda stations and in unsuitable hostels i don't blame them for avioding the system. I know of teens I grew up with and atm who are living on friends sofas who can't be housed or access services as they are not on the streets.

CDfm

If I was a politician, senior civil servant or social worker I wouldn't want to touch it.If I was a businessman -I would not want to invest in one.If I was a charity or religious order I would not go near one for obvious reasons.

They are a hot potato. Wherever you have a facility problems and abuse allegations ,some true and some false follow.

Whats more paedophiles are attracted to them and you can't legislate for that.

So what you are looking at is mainstream psychiatric institutions or attaching them to the prison service and thats the reason.

So unless you have one of the new education groups like, Educate Together, stepping up and saying we will run and manage them, then I dont see it happening. Do you.

Nevyn

I don't think we should have charities runing state care falcities.
Educate together it a charity aimed at patroning schools anything else is outside of it's remit.
The government needs to stop letting outside groups do it's work for them.

CDfm

Thaed you are talking about a group of young people of which approxamety 2 a year die in state care through "unnatural causes".

So you wont specify what type of facility you want but my guess is such a facilty would need to be attached to a psychiatric unit or the prison/probation service. Thats where it would naturally be based -either a psychiatric type service or a boot camp.

I wouldnt want to run one myself as it would be a nightmare.

There is no guarantee that by having that type of service you would decrease the amount of deaths. If anything it would be worse as you would institutionalise a group. Not only that but you would have to create institutions to house 5,000 "juvenile prisoners".

A bit kneejerk but that is the natural extension of what you propose and the natural extension of it.

Nevyn

You are the one who has painted it as an interment camp, not I.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

You are the one who has painted it as an interment camp, not I.

I don't see how else you could do it.

There are 2 basic models either, care in the community or institutions(which was abandoned).

So how would you do it and how would that address the problem.

EDIT: The other thing that has been mentioned is that we do not know the breakdown of the client group or those who died by age,gender or cause of death.So you cannot compare it with the normal population other than by the basis of headline statistics.

You also do not have positive outcomes to compare it with for the larger group that voluntarily become part of the system.

Nevyn

There should be children's home for those who can't be found a foster home, be they akin to boarding schools or a home for kids/teen to stay in while they finish thier education to leaving cert level.

They need not be borstals, not all teens in care are juvenile delinquents.

CDfm

Thaedydal wrote: »

There should be children's home for those who can't be found a foster home, be they akin to boarding schools or a home for kids/teen to stay in while they finish thier education to leaving cert level.

.

And we should call them St Trinians and have merry japes.

I do not know what your idea of boarding schools is but they are institutions run along strict lines of discipline. I know as I went to one.They exist because they have that inherent discipline that the "members " subscribe to.

They need not be borstals,

So the type of child it works for needs to be able to accept that. The type of child you are talking about here may have behavioral, psychiatric or substance abuse problems. So you would need discipline plus some kind of theraputic regime. These are the high risk ones that may die of unnatural causes and that is the problem you are addressing. You are also assuming that they will voluntarily go there and stay there.

not all teens in care are juvenile delinquents

Foster carers recieve an allowance of 352 euro per child per week plus childrens allowance etc. These teens fit in the current fostering system.

What you are describing to me sounds like an industrial school.Even if you put Jackie Skelly's name over the door and called it a fitness center it would still be an industrial school.

Nevyn

There is an acute shortage of foster parents in the country esp those who will take on teens, which is part of why such houses/untils are needed.

CDfm

I wasnt aware there was a shortage and I know several families that foster children. What is the shortfall??

More apply to foster as jobless offer helping hand






By Clodagh Sheehy

Friday August 28 2009 evening herald

More people are applying to become foster parents, as rising unemployment takes its toll.
New figures show applications to Foster First Ireland (FFI), which vets, trains and provides foster parents for the HSE, have increased by a third in the first six months of 2009.
FFI director Stephen Jacques believes the rising interest in fostering can be explained by the fact more people are spending their days at home.
Mr Jacques said: "We had 403 requests in the first six months of this year, compared to 306 for the same period last year.

Nonetheless setting up institutions of this type for problem teens will inevitably lead to an institution and will they solve the death problem.

You havent commented on the point I made that you propose industrial schools,albeit under a different name.