Arkansas Blog

With the current shortage of foster homes, I will agree with those who oppose Initiated Act 1 that anything is better than nothing.
But I have serious doubts that there are enough homosexual couples in Arkansas interested in fostering to truly put a dent in the problem. And I suspect there are even fewer kids...especially teens...who would welcome the chance to live in a homosexual home.

The current North Point tv ad currently in high rotation comes to mind. Just replace Judge Reinhold with a gay couple and the weary traveller with a teen in foster care.
Only the weary traveler has the option to run.
The foster teen has no say in his or her placement.

Through this proposed act, the "Family Council" also is telling Arkansans how they can plan for their own childrens' future. That's right folks - it is not just the adoptions through the state that are affected here. I notice the "Family Council" hasn't touted this little tidbit to the public.

I would have thought they'd know better than to try to sneak unnoticed into Arkansas families' private decisions like this but it seems pretty clear that the "Family Council" thinks they can (and should) intrude on every Arkansas family this way and that they plan to use the gaydar as stealth.

As Max noted, this act will also exclude everyone who is *straight* but living with another person from fostering and adopting. There may not be enough gay couples to make a *huge* dent in the foster care crisis that 10 years of this type of ban has helped create, but any couples, gay and straight, who have interest and ability to care for children will make a dent in the chronic problem of not enough homes. The size of the dent is all relative, particularly if you are the child without any home where you will be cared for and loved.

I wouldn't want to have to answer for this stunt at the Pearly Gates, for sure. Bad juju, very bad.

Knock Knock makes it sound as if anyone shows up and says give me an orphan and one is just handed out.

That is not the case.

I expect that an orphan above a certain age has some say in their placement.

If a social worker out there with knowledge could advise me on this I would appreciate it.

My grandmother on my mother's side was the classic Rosie the Riveter during WWII. She was divorced from my drunk grandfather. A single mother couldn't afford to raise kids even if she was building bombers in Kansas City for the war effort. She was still paid "women's wages".My mother and aunt and uncles were handed over to St. Joseph's orphanage in NLR.

My mom, and her one sister and 3 brothers ALL claim ANYTHING would have been preferred to the loony nuns they had raising them.

Now work into the mix that the state has allowed FOUR CHILDREN IN THE FOSTER CARE SYSTEM this year TO DIE, THIS YEAR!

I say screen housedholds for suitability based on verifyable standards and do all you can to get these unfortunate children placed!

Act 1 would not allow the widowed grandmother of an orphan to adopt her own grandchild if the grandmother had some widowed room mate helping with the bills.

One of the many problems with this initiative is the unintended consequences. Let's suppose that a good liberal couple volunteering to help ACORN is shot down while filling in absentee ballots for drunk homeless citizens in support of their lord and savior Obama, and stray bullets take them out. Let's suppose further that the couple wishes that in the event of their deaths that their 2 rug rats be raised by their uncle X who has just returned from his honeymoon with his ugly fat liberal wife Y. Because X & Y have not been married for 2 years, they are not allowed to be foster parents. While the couple may be fat, smelly, and stupid, they probably ought to be allowed to foster the children. If the stupid initiative passes, the rug rats could be legally adopted by a single gay person who doesn't cohabitate, but they could not be fostered/adopted by the aunt/uncle for up to 2 years. Jerry Cox needs to find a different way to torment gays/lesbians, this one's a loser.

Severus -

Long time, no see.

Amen.

3,500 "kids" in any given year in Arkansas, wanting to live with a family instead of confined to an institution?

And THIS is the best we can offer Arkansas' children because of hateful religious bigots?

Supporters of Initiated Act I are, oh, how to put this delicately?

Scum.

If they're your friends, drop them.

If they're your family, turn your back and walk away.

Or say nothing, do nothing, "make nice" and enable our state's ugliest citizens in perpetuating ignorance and hate.

Hurt people. Hurt children.

Hurt Arkansas.

You REALLY think the rest of us think God is as petty, stupid, cruel and vindictive as you?

Gee. How do I know you're Republican?

ALL Families Matter:

As November approaches, many in Arkansas are lining up on different sides of the fence regarding Initiated Act 1 and its attempt to ban unmarried heterosexual, lesbian and gay couples from providing foster care or adopting.

Sadly, the most vulnerable, children in need of good homes are being used. Not only are unmarried heterosexual, lesbian and gay couples being targeted by the Arkansas Family Council, Initiated Act 1 will further define for ALL Arkansans, gay and straight just who can be a family. In addition to denying children access to safe and loving homes it goes further in that it will dictate to all Arkansans who they can leave their children with in the event of the parent's death or disability. Regardless of a family's wishes and belief that their blood relatives or close family friends who may be unmarried straight, lesbian, or gay couples will be the best choice to adopt or foster their surviving children; under Initiated Act 1 they will be unable to choose that option for their children.

We keep hearing that only married, heterosexual couples can provide safe and loving homes. And we all know that this is blatantly untrue. Our very own Governor Mike Bebee was raised by a single mom. And many more of us have been raised in a variety of family configurations. The fact of the matter is that in Arkansas only 19% of the state's families consist of the highly touted "traditional family", a married mother and father raising their biological children.

There are currently thousands of children in Arkansas who live in single parent homes and in homes with unmarried couples or caregivers. Over three thousand of these children already live in same sex parented households. And the truth is that the overwhelming majority of the children in all of these families are not remotely in any danger of being abused.

Ironically most of the children who come to foster care in Arkansas do so from heterosexual as well as married couple homes. The ability to procreate within the bounds of marriage does not guarantee good parenting skills.

Arkansas' Department of Human Services (DHS) has an unofficial ban on placing children in unmarried couple or same sex households. However, marriage status and heterosexuality did absolutely nothing to protect the lives of the four children who died in foster care this summer. Yet there is no ballot initiative to deny heterosexual married couples from providing foster care or adoption. We know this was horribly tragic, the loss of these young lives, but it never occurs to us to make a blanket ban on this group of parents. Because we get it - that this is an aberration, not the norm. Just as the overwhelming majority of those who present as potential foster or adoptive parents will make excellent parents, regardless of their marriage status or sexual orientation.

The reality is that Arkansas is comprised of many forms of non-traditional families. These include grandparent's raising their grandchildren, extended family members who live together, unmarried couples - straight and gay with and without children, step-families, single parent households, etc. Marriage does not automatically make any of these homes better for the children in them. It is only the quality of the parenting, the commitment to one's family, access to resources and most of all, the love in the home that makes a good home for any child.

There are bad apples in any lot; just as with non-foster parent households, there will be bad parents revealed in some foster home situations. The remedy is not in excluding whole groups of potential homes for children. The best standard for any home for the placement of a child is in the rigorous investigation of the applicants and competent monitoring of the child's interest in their new households.

All families in Arkansas matter. And if we wish to strengthen the bonds of families and increase the well being of our children then we must consider what is really in the best interest of children. Not only must we not succumb to hysteria, fear and misinformation and shrink the pool of potential foster and adoptive parents; we must look at the things that are affecting the well being of Arkansas' families. If we really want to lessen the number of children who require foster care and adoption then we must address the needs and concerns of families.

Families need access to living wage jobs, parenting classes, individual and family counseling and if needed, quality drug and alcohol rehabilitation. Families need affordable and quality health care, housing, child care, groceries, transportation, closing the achievement gap, etc. All of these things help make a family stronger; this is what it takes to help families stay together. However, given the current economy and political climate we are a long way from being able to meet these needs.

So, in the meantime, we need to make sure that every single home in Arkansas that is willing to provide a safe, secure and loving home for a child is given the opportunity to do so. The 3,000+ children who are in dire need of a good home are looking for us to act like grownups and really do what's in their best interest.

"...only 19 percent of the state's families consist of the highly touted 'traditional family,' a married mother and father raising their biological children."

"Over three thousand...children already live in same sex parented households" in Arkansas.

A source for these surprising and suspect figures would be nice.

The source for the numbers is the 2000 U.S. Census.

I'm non surprised at those figures. I know lots of children being raised in households that are not the "traditional" one man one woman household.

The fact that people actually step up to the plate to raise children is commendable. They just need to be checked out for possible abuse. It's not an easy job, why narrow the possible candidates for things that are irrelevant?