foster kids, LGBT parents, and Ken Starr

Last night Eric and I went to a first aid certification class, which we need for our foster care licensing. One of our fellow foster/adoptive parent trainees was there too; I’ll call her N. Because our training is designed for small classes, she and her partner S are the only other people in our class, and we’re getting to know each other pretty well.

N had good news: she and S have already found a set of siblings who interest them and are up for adoption, and received a positive response to their interest. The boy is autistic, and N has already lined up a bunch of community resources for autistic kids. N and S are gung-ho about adopting kids with developmental disabilities; N did her master’s thesis on disability-related issues and they are really well prepared for this. It was impossible not to share in her excitement, especially since our social worker had described these particular kids to us at our last class.

The foster system needs people like N and S a lot more than it needs people like me, frankly. When I first heard about those two kids, my first thoughts were: 1) can’t handle siblings and 2) can’t handle autism. We are meeting the kids on Sunday, because their foster parents are coming to talk to all of us, and I’m pretty sure that seeing the two of them with the two women who may well become their parents is going to set off my tear ducts something awful. (I hope not, though. I hate tearing up in public.)

This morning, I had an action alert in my inbox from the Human Rights Campaign, the national LGBT advocacy organization, reminding me that today, before the California Supreme Court, Ken Starr—remember him?— argues in favor of forcibly divorcing all of the same-sex couples who married in California before Proposition 8. His argument? That the state must “protect the welfare of children.” By divorcing their parents.

I wish I could talk to Ken Starr a little bit about the welfare of children, though I suspect he’s too hate-driven to be moved by the miles of professional opinion debunking his claims. As it is, I had to make do with signing yet another HRC petition, which you should sign too, by the way, because it’s the least we can do, and we have to do that much. I did that, and then I went over the Waiting Children pages from Kansas foster care agencies, and looked at kids, dozens and dozens and dozens of kids, most of them older than most people want to adopt, many with developmental disabilities, many described with subtle language that implies they are still coping with traumatic pasts. Many of the kids, when quoted, described themselves as “helpful.” If that doesn't break your heart, then I doubt you have one. Imagine any of the teenagers you know feeling like they need to be helpful in order to deserve parents.

My impression is that the foster system would take an enormous hit if fostering and adoption by LGBT parents was universally banned. This 2007 study has some interesting finds in that direction; scroll down to “Parenting and Foster Care.” (I found the abstract elsewhere, but the presentation I linked here is more readable.) I also have the impression that the biggest hit would be to foster kids with disabilities. According to that study, thirty-two percent of foster children in same-sex couple households have disabilities, a higher percentage than is the case for any other demographic of foster parents.

The study also estimated these figures:

* Prohibiting GLB people from fostering would cost an estimated $87 to $130 million dollars nationwide.

* Prohibiting GLB people from fostering would result in the removal of 9,000 to 14,000 children from existing foster families.

So when we argue for the rights of LGBT people to be parents, we’re not only arguing for equal rights to parenting for a minority group. We’re also arguing for the right of every child to have a caring family.

I wish I could be more articulate on this, but after looking at all those Waiting Children—none of whom I feel equipped to adopt myself—I’m too heartbroken to come up with anything smart. People like Ken Starr are the enemies of children and families and love and human decency. They would rather leave foster children parentless than investigate their ludicrous notions of what constitutes an acceptable family structure. And leaving foster children parentless is the logical conclusion of the policies they pursue.