AR - Rep. Harris rehomed his adopted daughter to man who sexually abused her

[MyBelle]

That's a nice theory, but it isn't how the world works.

Sometimes parents have a hard time bonding with their biological babies, despite the instinctual love and the mix of "bonding" hormones going through their bodies.

To think you start loving a child the moment you signed some papers is highly unrealistic, imo. Sometimes, you never do develop that relationship. I believe many bio parents love their children, but don't like them. But adopted children don't even have that luxury.

Indeed, that is the point!

 

[K_Z]

After accusing high level DHS officials of threatening abandonment charges when he tried to give his adopted daughters back to the state, representative Justin Harris is releasing more information about the controversy, telling THV11 through an attorney that the department knew he gave his daughters to another family and did nothing about it.

Attorney Jennifer Wells told THV11 by phone Monday Division of Children and Family Services Director Cecile Blucker was aware of the rehoming but didn't report it to authorities. Blucker denied our requests for an interview as the department does not comment on specific adoption cases.

http://www.thv11.com/story/news/local/2015/03/09/harris-new-allegations/24683497/

BBM. Seems like a calculated pre-emptive strike, carefully released by the attorney for Harris-- signaling that if Harris goes down, he's bringing Blucker with him. That's how I read that.

Also pretty interesting that they waited a week to "release" those new details, eh?

I wouldn't be surprised if by the end of this week, Harris will allege that Blucker drove the kids to Eric Francis' house herself! Sheesh.

He should just resign already. Does this guy really have any local support?? Does anyone think he did a good thing by re-homing these girls the way he did??

 

[Margo/Mom]

There are no constitutional issues preventing federal intervention. In fact, the interstate compact fixes responsibility to the state for adoptive and foster children that fall within their state jurisdiction.

Interstate Compact on the Placement of Children (ICPC)

The ICPC is a contract among member states and U.S. territories authorizing them to work together to ensure that children who are placed across state lines for foster care or adoption receive adequate protection and support services. The ICPC establishes procedures for the placement of children and fixes responsibility for agencies and individuals involved in placing children. To participate in the ICPC, a state must enact into law the provisions of the ICPC.

http://www.childsworld.ca.gov/pg1316.htm

Participation in the ICPC is still a choice made by the states. The deal may be sweetened--just speculating here--I don't know if this is the case--by making it a requirement to receive federal adoption subsidy. I could be totally wrong on that, however, since subsidies derive from Title IV-E of Social Security, making it a federal entitlement going to the child (it has to follow the child even if placed out of state--and still flows through the placing agency). However, participation hinges on the state enacting legislation at the state level to carry out what is contained in the compact. It is not a federal law.

 

[Margo/Mom]

That's a nice theory, but it isn't how the world works.

Sometimes parents have a hard time bonding with their biological babies, despite the instinctual love and the mix of "bonding" hormones going through their bodies.

To think you start loving a child the moment you signed some papers is highly unrealistic, imo. Sometimes, you never do develop that relationship. I believe many bio parents love their children, but don't like them. But adopted children don't even have that luxury.

Bonding is something of an inborn trait. We used to discourage foster parents from bonding with children--in order to avoid the pain of loss when ultimately placed (or returned). However, it turns out that children are more likely to be able to bond following adoption if they have bonded with someone earlier.

But there are also some developmental realities. One is that kids who are severely abused at a very early age may have had that bonding trait so severely damaged that they are never able to bond with anyone--or only with long-term intensive therapy. The other is that developmentally kids are programmed not only to bond as young children, but at a certain age to begin to pull away from the adults that they have bonded with. Adoptive families must be educated about the realities of adopting older children. They may never achieve a true bond. This doesn't mean that there can be no family relationship, but it is different.

 

[K_Z]

Governor backs bills to banish re-homing

A broad effort in the Legislature to end the practice of "re-homing" adopted children in Arkansas will have the support of Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a spokesman said Monday.

On Monday, a state senator filed legislation similar to bills filed by two other lawmakers that aim to end a practice brought to light last week by the Arkansas Times. The story detailed how Rep. Justin Harris, R-West Fork, and his wife, Marsha, "re-homed" two adopted daughters,

only to result in the rape of one of the girls by her new caretaker.

On Monday, a spokesman for Hutchinson, J.R. Davis, said that the governor met last week with the two state representatives who filed the legislation and that the governor plans to work with lawmakers and officials from the Department of Human Services and to be involved as the bills go through the legislative process.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/mar/10/governor-backs-bills-to-banish-re-homin/

Looks like there is broad bi-partisan support for this issue, and multiple bills in both house and senate, so I'm guessing something will be passed this legislative session. They're going to have to haggle out the exact language. I'm concerned with the language in this article that internationally adopted kids could still fly under the radar, as state DHS doesn't usually have involvement in those cases. The language they are contemplating in Arkansas is related to re-homing kids that DHS is already involved with. I see the urgency to pass a bill this session (and March is a bit late to be introducing bills that need a lot of debate and discussion), but I hope they ultimately write a bill that includes all adopted kids. For now, they want to leave re-homing bio kids out of the discussion.

And this is troublesome-- a ginormous hole that needs to be filled in:

If an adopted child's custody is transferred, and DHS officials did know of it, the new caretakers wouldn't be required to submit to the same intensive vetting process that adoptive parents go through with her agency, Webb said.

"If there is no allegation of abuse or neglect, we don't have a legal mechanism to get involved in that case," she said.

ETA: And when the house bill comes up for discussion in the committee Harris is vice chair, he should recuse himself from that hearing. IDK what the policies are in AR, but the committee chair should seek to exclude Harris from any discussion on that particular bill, if possible.

 

[Margo/Mom]

Governor backs bills to banish re-homing

A broad effort in the Legislature to end the practice of "re-homing" adopted children in Arkansas will have the support of Gov. Asa Hutchinson, a spokesman said Monday.



http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/mar/10/governor-backs-bills-to-banish-re-homin/

Looks like there is broad bi-partisan support for this issue, and multiple bills in both house and senate, so I'm guessing something will be passed this legislative session. They're going to have to haggle out the exact language. I'm concerned with the language in this article that internationally adopted kids could still fly under the radar, as state DHS doesn't usually have involvement in those cases. The language they are contemplating in Arkansas is related to re-homing kids that DHS is already involved with. I see the urgency to pass a bill this session (and March is a bit late to be introducing bills that need a lot of debate and discussion), but I hope they ultimately write a bill that includes all adopted kids. For now, they want to leave re-homing bio kids out of the discussion.

And this is troublesome-- a ginormous hole that needs to be filled in:



ETA: And when the house bill comes up for discussion in the committee Harris is vice chair, he should recuse himself from that hearing. IDK what the policies are in AR, but the committee chair should seek to exclude Harris from any discussion on that particular bill, if possible.

Clearly the devil will be in the details. Overlooking international adoptions is a really big issue, as the overwhelming majority of rehomed kids are from international adoption. They are also the least supported in terms of any available help beyond the parents personal resources. There has been something of an attitude that if your family went abroad, you shouldn't come knocking on a domestic door when you get into trouble. Couple this with the current sentiment that makes it impossible to even have a discussion about immigration law and you see the issue. Many states/counties are wholly reliant on the feds for provision of adoption subsidies and services. I don't see the current Congress being willing to consider opening that up to children who are brought from other countries.

As it is, we have folks claiming that the currently available subsidies encourage corruption at the local level--supposing that they encourage agencies to grab up supposedly adoptable children on flimsy excuses in order to draw federal dollars (I swear, I am not making this up).

I am also cautious when a DHS rep suggests that their oversight be limited in cases in which there is no abuse or neglect, or that the home-study of receiving families be streamlined.

 

[shadowraiths]

The two bills:

AR HB 1676
AR HB 1648

 

[shadowraiths]

FAYETTEVILLE, AR (KNWA)- Signatures continue being added to an online petition asking Governor Hutchinson to call for the resignation of Representative Justin Harris (R-West Fork).​

link

Petition

 

[MyBelle]

Participation in the ICPC is still a choice made by the states. The deal may be sweetened--just speculating here--I don't know if this is the case--by making it a requirement to receive federal adoption subsidy. I could be totally wrong on that, however, since subsidies derive from Title IV-E of Social Security, making it a federal entitlement going to the child (it has to follow the child even if placed out of state--and still flows through the placing agency). However, participation hinges on the state enacting legislation at the state level to carry out what is contained in the compact. It is not a federal law.

A simple google search would turn up Arkansas as a participant in the ICPC but then, I think you know that.

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/burea...nd Neglected Children/Exhibits/Exhibit 43.pdf

 

[Margo/Mom]

A simple google search would turn up Arkansas as a participant in the ICPC but then, I think you know that.

http://www.arkleg.state.ar.us/burea...nd Neglected Children/Exhibits/Exhibit 43.pdf

All 50 states have signed on. However, that does not mean that all 50 have put enabling legislation in place. It has to be codified within the laws of the state before anyone is required (or enabled) to act on it.

But in this case, so far as I can tell, all of the home-changing occurred within the state of Arkansas.

 

[shadowraiths]

Justin Harris heaps more blame on DHS for his adoption decision

[...]

Today, Harris added a new dimension to his story. In an interview with KTHV he said Cecile Blucker, the director of the DHS Division of Children and Family Services, was aware of his handoff of the children to Francis but didn't report it to other authorities. DHS still won't comment.

[...]

The latest from Harris is another curiosity. He's said he supports legislation that has been introduced to prohibit rehoming without an approval process. In other words, he'd like to see a felony made of action he took himself. He's also now blaming DHS for not doing something about his decision-making.

[...]

Be sure to look for the next edition of this story on-line tonight or later this week in the print edition. It has new material you'll want to read.​

link

 

[K_Z]

The two bills:

AR HB 1676
AR HB 1648

Thank you so much for looking up these bills. The article also mentions a senate bill and names the sponsor. If you or anyone else has time, could you look up that bill as well? I'd like to look at them line by line and side by side. (It's a little hobby of mine, lol.)

(I apologize for being so lazy and asking. I'm on the go and confined to mobile till late tonight.)

Monday morning, Sen. Bobby Pierce, D-Sheridan, filed his own legislation, Senate Bill 874, which would "prohibit re-homing private transfers of adopted minors."

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/mar/10/governor-backs-bills-to-banish-re-homin/

 

[shadowraiths]

The article also mentions a senate bill and names the sponsor.

http://www.arkansasonline.com/news/2015/mar/10/governor-backs-bills-to-banish-re-homin/

Thanks for the heads up!

This is in its very early stages (as in, nothing written yet) but it's a start, and I'm thrilled to see it!

AR SB 874

 

[MyBelle]

All 50 states have signed on. However, that does not mean that all 50 have put enabling legislation in place. It has to be codified within the laws of the state before anyone is required (or enabled) to act on it.

But in this case, so far as I can tell, all of the home-changing occurred within the state of Arkansas.

Arkansas has legislation in place and there is more legislation on the table because some people are incapable of doing their job. I'm sure Arkansas DHS does appreciate those that are sticking up for them and making excuses.

JMO

 

[Margo/Mom]

Arkansas has legislation in place and there is more legislation on the table because some people are incapable of doing their job. I'm sure Arkansas DHS does appreciate those that are sticking up for them and making excuses.

JMO

What is the content of the legislation in place, and how would it apply to this case?

 

[kaen]

I think that there are people who are not instinctually in love with their kids. Yes, it is true. Not the case in my situation, though. I fell in love with the picture from the moment I saw it. Then, I fell in love with the child when I first laid eyes and hands on him.

Also, true that we might have child we love but do not necessarily like. But I see that as an issue of parenting because the parents need to get right on their role and do the hard stuff rather than blaming the kids. I imagine that the Harris children may have been hard but that is part of the dynamic that can happen when you adopt an older child who has been abused-- a condition that the Harris parents knew.

My original point is that once the paperwork is signed, a child should not be the "adopted", "bio", or "purple" one. They are "your child" and keeping that label continues to perpetuate that an adoptive child is less than because of the social stigma.

That's a nice theory, but it isn't how the world works.

Sometimes parents have a hard time bonding with their biological babies, despite the instinctual love and the mix of "bonding" hormones going through their bodies.

To think you start loving a child the moment you signed some papers is highly unrealistic, imo. Sometimes, you never do develop that relationship. I believe many bio parents love their children, but don't like them. But adopted children don't even have that luxury.

 

[believe09]

Justin Harris heaps more blame on DHS for his adoption decision

[...]

Today, Harris added a new dimension to his story. In an interview with KTHV he said Cecile Blucker, the director of the DHS Division of Children and Family Services, was aware of his handoff of the children to Francis but didn't report it to other authorities. DHS still won't comment.

[...]

The latest from Harris is another curiosity. He's said he supports legislation that has been introduced to prohibit rehoming without an approval process. In other words, he'd like to see a felony made of action he took himself. He's also now blaming DHS for not doing something about his decision-making.

[...]

Be sure to look for the next edition of this story on-line tonight or later this week in the print edition. It has new material you'll want to read.​

link

Any bets on a sudden visit to rehab next? I hope that PR firm is running for the hills...

 

[shadowraiths]

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KTHV) – In a one on one interview on Tuesday, State Representative Justin Harris says he re-homed his adopted daughters a second time after giving them away to family friend Eric Francis because of behavioral problems.

"We were ultimately responsible as a family," Harris told THV11. "They were having the same issues we were and so that's when the new family was up to speed with the behavioral issues."​

link

 

[shadowraiths]

Since last Friday, Rep. Justin Harris has leveled serious accusations against the Department of Human Services, saying he was threatened with abandonment charges if he and his wife returned their adopted daughters.

[...]

Harris says he was already working on safe haven legislation for adoptive parents to return kids with no problem.

“I met with the friends of the court; they said this is already law. I said what are you talking about? And they said this is already law. It's in the bill of rights you should have gotten as adopted parents. And we weren't given a bill of rights,” Harris said.

[...]

Harris would not answer the last question on if he thinks he should be legislating on matters related to DHS because he said would not take another question.

​

link

 

[tlcya]

LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KTHV) – In a one on one interview on Tuesday, State Representative Justin Harris says he re-homed his adopted daughters a second time after giving them away to family friend Eric Francis because of behavioral problems.

"We were ultimately responsible as a family," Harris told THV11. "They were having the same issues we were and so that's when the new family was up to speed with the behavioral issues."​

link

BBM this jumps out as I feel the Harris parents are indeed ultimately responsible. For what happened to the child entrusted by adoption to them. But the way he says it and means it is a copout. He means to say, yes, we are ultimately responsible, but thanks to our reporting problems and the pedophile household backing us up the new parents were totally up to speed.
Not nearly good enough Mr. Harris. Not even on the same planet.