When you think about the foster care system, you think about the kids. While the system is very obviously about the children, it is also very much about those who support the children: the foster parents. The retention of parents and foster families is a massive problem for the system. The turnover rate for foster care parents ranges from 30 to 50% each year, according to Foster Focus. This means almost half of all foster parents make the decision to no longer open their homes to a child in need. This fact combined with the increasing number of children entering the system, leaves a huge shortage of available homes for the children.

A big question is: why? Why are parents not staying in the system? Why are they choosing to drop out? The answers range based on the situation, but there is one constant. According to Foster Focus, 80% of foster parents who took place in a survey claimed they experienced feelings of grief and loss after a child from foster care transitioned out of their home. It is important to examine where these feelings come from and the underlying basis of these feelings of loss. For many foster parents, the sudden departure of a child can leave feelings of shock and may leave the family confused. They may feel angry or disappointed with the system especially if they feel removal of the child from their home or reunification with the birth family is not in the best interest of the child.

According to a study by Lois Urquhart, foster parents who are “’unprepared or unsupported for the separation and loss experience [are] considered foster parents at risk’ of leaving foster care.” Foster parents who feel unsupported by the system upon the departure of a child from their home are the most likely to be frustrated by the feelings of grief and loss. Only 33% of foster parents said they had enough training or support in the area of dealing with feelings of loss. This number is dramatically small especially when considering the emotional task foster care places on parents. It leaves many questions over what can be done to improve the system and keep foster parents going.

A big improvement has been seen in a campaign called CHAMPS. According to the Brookings Institution’s Center on Children and Families, it “helps states deliver better outcomes for children through improved foster parent recruitment and retention.” The CHAMPS campaign was introduced at a 2019 convention that focused on the best practices for dealing with common challenges in foster care and outlined the key drivers for better outcomes.   They key drivers were compiled and are as followed: child-centered, data-driven and informed by continuous quality improvement, governed by multi-level agency leadership, collaborative and transparent within the agency and with families, reflective of youth and parent voice and sustainable. The CHAMPS collaborative and comprehensive approach is aimed at achieving and sustaining recruitment and retention of foster parents with the idea that the best way to help the children in the system is to have parents who are enthusiastic and involved. The hope with the CHAMPS campaign is to inform state policy makers and influence change at a large level to improve the well being of both the children and parents in the system.

Teens in the foster care system have much lower adoption rates than younger children and wait much longer to be adopted. If a child is not adopted, they face aging out of the system and do not have a place to call home. According to adoption.com more than 23,000 children reach the age of 18 and age out of the foster care system each year, and 20% of these children will become instantly homeless. Therefore, for teens in the system, instead of counting down the days until they become an adult, dread it knowing the harsh reality they will soon face.

Essentially, when a child becomes an adult at the age of 18 there is no more funding for foster families due to what TFI Family Connections calls a “threshold” where the now adults are no longer eligible to receive assistance. For most, when they turn 18, they are in the midst of high school, and not ready to take on full adult responsibilities. Once foster children age out of the system, they are much less likely to obtain a high school diploma and often must drop out to support themselves. A high percentage go right from attending high school to living on the streets.

An NPR study puts into perspective how dire the situation becomes for those who age out and the increased risks they face. By the age of 24, less than half of those that aged out were employed, and only about 6% had two- or four-year degrees. At 24 more than two-thirds of the women had their own children, and 60% of the men had been convicted of a crime. Almost a quarter of those surveyed were homeless at some point since leaving foster care. Additionally, The National Foster Youth Institute reports one out of every two kids who ages out of the system will develop a substance dependence, and about 25% of children who age out will suffer from PTSD. The statistics are staggering and suggest a major crack in the foster care system, yet next to nothing is being done to assist children as they transition out of the system.

Like many of the other problems the foster care system faces, there are different solutions and many of which are incredibly complex, but also very doable. The idea of extending care to the age of 21 is one suggestion that has been incredibly popular. By adding extra years in the system beyond 18, people in the system would have much better chances of completing high school. Completing high school would open many more opportunities and jobs compared to not having a diploma or something comparable like a GED. This “extension period” of 18 to 21 could be a sort of “transition” out of the system were the new adults could be provided the tools to succeed. These could be things like financial literacy and other independence and adult skills. Transitional housing has also been a popular suggestion as it prevents the immediate homelessness that many experience once they turn 18. Another popular suggestion of transitional support is providing those who turn 18 a counselor who discusses with them their future, and their aspirations, and provides assistance in reaching these aspirations.

Most children who are not in the foster care system do not just get cut off from the support of their families at the age of 18, so why should children in foster care be abruptly cut off once they turn 18? By allowing these children a period of transition into adulthood, like most 18-year old’s get, we as a society are better able to prepare them for success.

The opioid crisis in America is well documented by the media. Current statistics from The National Institute on Drug Abuse indicates every day about 130 people in the US die from an opioid overdose. About 1.7 million people suffer from substance abuse disorders related to opioids and over 600,000 suffer from heroin addictions. This problem has been spiraling since the 1990s when pharmaceutical companies told the medical community that patients would not become addicted to opioid prescriptions leading to a huge increase in the rates of prescription. These medications were in fact addictive which led to widespread misuse and addiction across America, and opioid overdose rates skyrocketed.

With numbers like these, it is obvious this issue has a large impact on many aspects of society. Only some of these issues have started to be addressed, and one impact which has often been overlooked is the impact of this crisis on the foster care system. The increase of children in the system stems from more children coming from homes where they were neglected due to parental drug abuse. According to Opioid Help, 32% of the increase of children in the system is directly due to the surge in opioid use in America, and the side effects that come from parents who are using. Opioid Help indicates around 75% of the children in local foster care come from homes where parental opioid use took place.

The magnitude of the connection between opioid use and the foster care crisis can be seen in many of the states with high rates of opioid use and the subsequent foster care impact. A good example of the state level impact can be seen in Tennessee, a state with one of the highest rates of parental opioid use in America. They recently reported a 10% increase in children in foster care. Similarly, in states like Maryland the rate of opioid- related deaths quadrupled in six years and subsequently overwhelmed their foster care system.

When a parent becomes addicted to opioids multiple different consequences can lead to their child’s removal from their home. Many times, parents are prescribed these drugs for something very simple, but will very quickly become captured by the incredibly addictive substances and are unable to escape the grasp the drugs have on them. In many cases opioid pills become “too weak” and parents will turn to stronger substances like heroin. The chemicals in opioids have effects on parents physical and mental state, often making them unable to take care of their children. Opioids lead to increases in neglect and family conflict as parents are unable to take care of daily responsibilities. Substance abuse cases in the foster care system often correlate with some of the most severe cases of abuse and neglect, according to Children’s Rights, and often have some of the youngest victims.

It should be noted some significant steps have been taken by states to address the opioid-foster care link. Kentucky pioneered a program in 2007 called Sobriety Treatment and Recovery Teams or “START” which crated an approach for at-risk parents that allows home visits, childcare vouchers and mentorship for people in recovery. It is an expensive program to run, but it is believed to save money on other expenditures related to an addiction that is not treated. Under the model when a child is learned to be at risk and the parent is identified to have a substance abuse disorder, the parent is sent into the treatment program and given a team that reaches across various agencies including children’s aid. The START program has been a model for many programs in other states. While this program has made huge strides in protecting children with addicted parents and attempts to reduce the strain on foster care, there is much more that needs to be done. The program is expensive, and in many ways not developed enough or reaching enough places to have a significant impact on relieving the system. A more intense national approach like START would be the most effective approach to begin to relieve the foster care system.

Most people have heard of foster care, but how many people truly understand what foster care means? Foster care is defined as an agreement where an adult agrees to care for a child who’s legal guardian is unable to care for them. The reason for a child’s entrance into foster care may vary from person to person, but the bottom line is children enter foster care in need of a safe place to stay. Despite what many people may believe about foster care, the goal of is reunification with the birth family except in circumstance where it is agreed adoption is in the child’s best interest.

A significant factor that should be discussed about foster care in understanding the nature and background of the crisis are the numbers. According to The Foster Club, there are currently over 400,000 children in foster care and the number grows each year. This equates to approximately one in 184 children in the US in foster care. The current rate of children entering the foster care system is around one child every two minutes. Over a third of the children in the system are under five years old, representing a majority of those in the system, and the average age of a foster child in the US is just over eight years old. The numbers are staggering, yet so few people consider how many people this system affects.

Much of the crisis and lack of attention to this issue comes from a series of misconceptions about the nature of foster care. These misconceptions should be debunked before one can dig deeper into the more serious issues of the system.

Many people assume foster parents are fostering for the stipend and the money. The reality is the stipend is often incredibly small which perpetuates the problem of a lack of available homes. While there are those horrible stories here and there about a foster parent in it for the money, the reality is this is not the case. At the same time, there is also the complete opposite misconception which assumes that taking in a foster child is an extreme financial burden. While taking care of a child obviously does cost money, a foster child should never be seen as a burden in any financial sense in the same way a biological child should not. The idea of the stipend for the foster child is to cover the necessities in caring for a child, but not be a source of income for the parent.

Some of the more damaging misconceptions about the foster care system that often serve as a deterrent for care or consideration of foster children are the stigmas that the children carry. Many people assume that children are in foster care because their parents do not want them. This is a hurtful misconception for both the children and their biological parents as most of the time the parent cannot care for the child for much deeper reasons.

Many also assume those in foster care are some sort of delinquent or have been in trouble with the law. This is also largely untrue as only a small portion of these children have ever been in legal trouble. In a less extreme sense it is also assumed these children have severe and deeply ingrained behavioral problems and will only be trouble if they are welcomed into a home. This is also not true, and many of these children’s surface level behavior problems come from a place of wanting love and security. These children are not “broken,” they want a home and stability in their lives.

Having a better understanding of the numbers and misconception of foster care helps set up and put in perspective the various crises the system is currently facing. These crises touch many different aspects of the system, but are so rarely featured in mainstream media and deserve to be called up for attention.