In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

In the U.S. 397,122 children are living without permanent families in the foster care system. 101,666 of these children are eligible for adoption, but nearly 32% of these children will wait over three years in foster care before being adopted.

http://www.ccainstitute.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=category&layout=blog&id=25&Itemid=43

I'm not saying this to hate on animal lovers or rescues, but every time I see one of those ASPCA or Humane Society ads with someone like Sarah McLachlan singing soulfully over pictures of abandoned and abused dogs and cats (and I see a lot of those advertisements), I always think "where are the ads showing abused and abandoned kids in need of a home?"

[silverweb]

1. I hear you.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]However, a child is a much more demanding commitment than a dog or cat any day of the week.

There were times I thought about it and even considered applying to be a foster parent in the past. Then, realizing my unstable energy level and certain physical limitations might not allow me to be a good one, I backed away from the idea.

Our social safety net is woefully inadequate. With free contraception for all, and better services and social support for single moms and struggling families and their children, there would be far fewer foster children in need. Reducing parental stress, illness/addiction, and domestic violence would be among the best ways to help biological parents keep their kids.

I'd rather start there rather than berate people who feel they aren't able to take on a long-term commitment to raise someone else's child, as rewarding as that may be for those who can do it.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

10. First, really I'm not trying to berate anyone.

Second:

Our social safety net is woefully inadequate. With free contraception for all, and better services and social support for single moms and struggling families and their children, there would be far fewer foster children in need. Reducing parental stress, illness/addiction, and domestic violence would be among the best ways to help biological parents keep their kids.

This ^^^^

[silverweb]

11. I'm sorry, that was a poor word choice.

[font color="navy" face="Verdana"]I know you weren't trying to berate anyone and were just stressing what should be our priorities as a society. It did sound a little bit like a rebuke, though, and that was the first word that came to mind.

We're definitely on the same page about the basics.

[alp227]

2. I don't like the "what about the others" argument.

This post has a "what about the men?" tone (in response to discussing women's issue) or "what about white people?" (in response to programs like Obama's "Brother's Keeper" aimed towards at-risk youth of color).

On the other hand, I think most people aren't as comfortable adopting a child as much as adopting a pet, because they feel children should be genetically theirs.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

9. I'm sorry you feel that way about the tone.

I do see your point, but "what about" is a question that needs to be asked. I think in the two instances you cite, it can be answered.

On the other hand, I think most people aren't as comfortable adopting a child as much as adopting a pet, because they feel children should be genetically theirs.

On one hand, I sense that you are right. On the other hand, my older daughter attends a school at which there are several Chinese girls that are the adoptive children of white, American parents.

[SamKnause]

3. There is no way to equate adopting a pet

to the adoption of a child.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

8. I'd agree with that

For me, it's simply an issue of media attention. That's all I'm trying to convey.

[LeftyMom]

4. The SPCA and the first child welfare organization were started in NYC by the same people.

I'm always really suspicious about the "but what about (some other important thing)" argument against dealing with animal issues because it's inevitably advanced by people who aren't doing shit about the other thing, either.

But as somebody who has worked in the foster system (and done animal rescue AT THE SAME TIME because caring isn't a zero sum game) here's an explanation of what you're apparently not considering: Most foster children are returned to their families. Of those who become adoptable, the vast majority of adoptions are by members of their extended families. The rest are mostly foster-to-adopt placements. So kids who "linger in the system" for years before being adopted may be in the same home for that entire time. Some kids have essentially permanent placements but remain fostered rather than adopted because their medical or other needs are better handled in this way, although there's been an effort to reduce this sort of thing by offering more services to adopted foster kids once they're finalized. In other words, the "lingering" going on is often of folders on desks, not of unloved children accompanied by sad music.

It's also important to remember that foster children ARE REAL CHILDREN. You can't put them in an ad and stigmatize them because they're real kids who go to school and would get teased by their classmates and embarrassed. Dogs don't care. They aren't going to hear about it later at the dog park.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

7. Thank you for the analysis.

I did know about the medical issues. I did not know that the vast majority of adoptions are by members of extended families. It makes sense, but it is something of which I was unaware.

The issue for me is the amount of media attention given to one versus the other.

I'm not trying to hate on animal rescues or shelters. They do good work. They've raised a lot of awareness. Both myself and the charming Lady Cecily are appalled that Mike Vick is being allowed to play in the NFL.

[REP]

5. Children in need have a publicly-funded system

From social workers and CPS who investigate reports of abuse and neglect to the foster system that houses children removed from their parents, there is a publicly-funded system in place to find abused/neglected children, rescue them from harm, and place them either with responsible members of their family or within the roster system. If you pay taxes, you are helping fund this system. There is need for a lot of reform and oversight - just take a look at how many children are injured, abused or killed in foster care - but since this is a system funded automatically from tax money, there's no need for ads.

There is no public system in a place to rescue, give medical aid, and then foster/rehome neglected and abused animals (companion animals and farm animals as well). Groups like the ASPCA are privately funded and need to run ads to call attention to the problem, what it is they do, and why they need money.

I don't begrudge either my money. I do wish the agencies involved with children would do a better job of protecting children and screening foster families. I do wish that those going overseas to get a baby to adopt would consider a child's needs first, and see if there's a child caught in the system who needs parents before trotting off to get the ethic baby du jour.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

6. I grant that point

..and this is probably a "me" problem. But I get frustrated inasmuch as I see maybe 3-4 ads on TV every day regarding abandoned/abused animals, and 2-3 posts on Facebook every day from friends obsessed with animal rescues dedicated to their dog breed of choice. For kids - I hear radio PSAs about "You don't have to be a perfect parent to adopt a teen in foster care", and I generally hear them late at night.

I do wish the agencies involved with children would do a better job of protecting children and screening foster families. I do wish that those going overseas to get a baby to adopt would consider a child's needs first, and see if there's a child caught in the system who needs parents before trotting off to get the ethic baby du jour.

I agree with this 100%.