Would you?

[Deleted User 114]

Absolutely not. IMO biological parents have an obligation to protect their biological children and should leave fostering for those who do not have biological minor children in the home.

[jas]

Not currently. Once my kids have moved out and I could devote my time and attention to him, then yes.

[Anonymous 1]

Absolutely not. IMO biological parents have an obligation to protect their biological children and should leave fostering for those who do not have biological minor children in the home.

Since I've seen a lot of "protect" statements. What makes you believe he'd be dangerous ?

[Traci_Momof2]

A complete stranger? No. Not at all.

Someone who's a friend of my son's who needs someone to step in and be a good support for him? Possibly. It would at least be a discussion that DH and I would have. The main deciding factor would be how much do we think that this individual could be a danger to others in the household.

[Traci_Momof2]

No, for multiple reasons:

I do not have energy left to deal with anymore children with high and unique needs. I am shocked by how exhausted I am dealing with my own three children.

I just listened to the book “girl, wash your face” who painted a realistic picture of the consequences of being a foster parent and what it could potentially mean to you children, friends and family. She stated it is fairly common for the false reports of abuse to be made against the foster family, putting the family though months of intrusive unfounded investigations.

I do not believe the broken system would be able to provide the financial resources to adequately care for the mental health care and academic needs of the child you describe. It would therefore be extremely expensive and require me to either 1) lower my standards and do a less than than adequate job OR 2) take money from funds for my biological children. I am not a peace with either of those options.

I felt a need to address your last point. I'm sure it varies from state to state, but at least in my state I don't think finances would be an issue. I know from my co-worker (who fostered her daughter before adopting her) all foster kids need to be on state health insurance, regardless of the income of the foster parents. So my co-worker's daughter had everything health related paid for by the state even though co-worker and her husband were more than capable of funding health insurance for her. And the mental health facility that my kids go to, they only accept that very same state insurance. I'm considered a "private pay" there since my own kids aren't on state insurance and I've asked them - I'm definitely a minority being private pay. Most of those parents don't pay a single thing out of pocket for the mental health care there. The counselors will even go visit the kids at school, all on the state's dime.
So personally, in the given situation, finances would actually be low on the concern list.

[LiveWhatULove]

No, for multiple reasons:

I do not have energy left to deal with anymore children with high and unique needs. I am shocked by how exhausted I am dealing with my own three children.

I just listened to the book “girl, wash your face” who painted a realistic picture of the consequences of being a foster parent and what it could potentially mean to you children, friends and family. She stated it is fairly common for the false reports of abuse to be made against the foster family, putting the family though months of intrusive unfounded investigations.

I do not believe the broken system would be able to provide the financial resources to adequately care for the mental health care and academic needs of the child you describe. It would therefore be extremely expensive and require me to either 1) lower my standards and do a less than than adequate job OR 2) take money from funds for my biological children. I am not a peace with either of those options.

I felt a need to address your last point. I'm sure it varies from state to state, but at least in my state I don't think finances would be an issue. I know from my co-worker (who fostered her daughter before adopting her) all foster kids need to be on state health insurance, regardless of the income of the foster parents. So my co-worker's daughter had everything health related paid for by the state even though co-worker and her husband were more than capable of funding health insurance for her. And the mental health facility that my kids go to, they only accept that very same state insurance. I'm considered a "private pay" there since my own kids aren't on state insurance and I've asked them - I'm definitely a minority being private pay. Most of those parents don't pay a single thing out of pocket for the mental health care there. The counselors will even go visit the kids at school, all on the state's dime.
So personally, in the given situation, finances would actually be low on the concern list.

Thanks for sharing. I am basing my experience on the amount of counseling and tutoring that my children have required. It has greatly exceeded the amount reimbursed from our private insurance and we have great benefits. I am assuming that state insurance would have limits & restrictions on how often you could see the counselor and attend therapy.

[famousglm714]

It’s something I wouldn’t even consider. I don’t willingly deal with addicts and that kind of person (no matter the age) will bring nothing but drama and chaos anywhere they are. I’ve dealt with them in the past and have lost most of my patience and compassion towards them. I’m not gonna lie.

[Shell7m]

If the child wasn't violent then yes I'd help. Everyone needs help at times.

[ReadingRainbow]

Absolutely not. IMO biological parents have an obligation to protect their biological children and should leave fostering for those who do not have biological minor children in the home.

Since I've seen a lot of "protect" statements. What makes you believe he'd be dangerous ?

You said he had issues with physical assault, right?

[MistressMonster]

I wouldn't personally.