It's About Time: Rethinking Our System of Care for Youth
By Virginia Rowden
“There's a billion people on the planet. What does any one life really mean? But in a family, you're promising to care about everything. The good things, the bad things, the terrible things, the mundane things... all of it, all of the time, every day. You're saying „Your life will not go unnoticed because I will notice it. Your life will not go un-witnessed because I will be your witness."1
Our kids need a witness.
In 1985, the Child and Family Services Act introduced the concept of “extended care” which gave CASs the legislative mandate to provide services to “former Crown wards” up to the age of 21 years.
That was twenty-four years ago. At that time it may have been reasonable to think that youth aged 18 would be ready to be “launched” on their own. I remember being a front-line worker with a caseload of youth and worrying about where they would find room and board, where they might get a job, who might “look out” for them. The 1985 CFSA amendments were a positive change, they allowed a continuation of support for those youth who had left foster care and still maintained a connection to the CAS. The changes also provided some opportunity for youth to continue with school, as long as they were also able to set up their residence, establish credit sufficient to get a phone and pay utilities. While the CASs could do this, there was no policy to require them to offer this to youth.
In 1994, the Extended Care and Maintenance policy was introduced to ensure that all youth were offered the opportunity of extended care. Also it was to provide an alternative to welfare, and later when the Conservative government cut welfare rates, the ECM rate was preserved to provide an incentive for connection to the CAS rather than the local welfare office. The program best supported those who were continuing with education. Youth who had found employment could only receive ECM if their income fell below minimum wage, and if it exceeded this amount the ECM rate was clawed back. Youth who needed to complete their high school education were required to do so from a base of “independent living”.
Youth have been advocating for changes to the care system for over 20 years. Their common position has been – treat us as you would your own kids. More recently they challenged the government and CASs to revisit policies and programs for youth in care, using one key overriding principle “what would a good parent do?” When recently asked about services that would assist their transition out of the care system, youth pushed back and stated categorically: “You are asking the wrong question! Don’t ask how to better prepare for termination. Ask us what we need to help us grow up.”
In 20062, more than 300 youth in care told government and CASs about the things that most worried them. The fear of leaving care was the most predominant concern. Financial, emotional, and educational support were at the top of the list, but in the words of a very wise young person “If you don’t deal with the issue of age, there is little point in making other changes. We’re just not ready.”
Since 2006, many CASs have listened to the recommendations of youth and changes have been made to financial support; more resources have been made available by both government and CASs to post-secondary support. A number of agencies have also changed service models in an attempt to provide better emotional support – largely through Independence Workers and peer support programs. The fundamental issue is still not addressed. It’s not about planning a better system for discharge, it about providing the best support possible to grow up.
It's time to deal with the construct we are using to fashion our "system of care" - it’s an antiquated system and by its design creates uncertainty, anxiety, dysfunction, inability to form relationships, and is just hurtful. For kids who come into CAS care for the long term, they are clear: the child welfare system has nothing to do with permanency; it is about preparation to be terminated, detached, ejected, rejected...and way before they are ready to leave.
The ages that define "independence" date back to 1897, when revisions to the Children's Protection Act made Children's Aid Societies the legal guardians of all girls under age thirteen, and the new age limit for commitment to the Refuge was set - for girls - at between thirteen and eighteen years.
From the Archives of Ontario:
… the Industrial Refuge for Girls opened in 1880 as a separate unit of the Andrew Mercer Reformatory for Women. Although separate from the Reformatory, the Refuge was administered by the same Superintendent and Assistant Superintendent, and shared the Reformatory's accountant, surgeon and school-mistress. Responsibility for the inspection of the Refuge, as well as for providing rules and regulations with respect to its management, discipline and policing, rested with the Ontario Inspector of Prisons and Public Charities.
The Industrial Refuge for Girls closed in 1905. At that time, homes were found for a majority of the girls, while others were placed with relatives. A few were transferred to various other custodial institutions.
This appears to be when the age of 18 surfaced, and it continues to guide our system of care. Also from this era:
- the start of the Klondike Gold Rush
- Charles Tupper became Prime Minister, and also Wilfred Laurier in the same year
- Ford’s Quadricycle – which pre-dated the automobile
- Nicholas II of Russia’s coronation in Moscow
- the premiere of Puccini’s La Boheme in Turin
- Oscar Wilde's play Salome which premiered in Paris
- the first modern Olympics since the Roman emperor Theodosius I banned the Ancient Games in AD 393 as part of the Christian campaign against paganism, and
- the “Yes, Virginia, there is a Santa Claus” letter was published in the New York Sun
And women did not have the vote.
It is time to deal with “age” in the statute (CFSA) and there are a number of Ontario precedents for doing so (drivers licensing, mandatory school age, smoking, drinking, consent to sexual activity). Ontario also needs to step up and align with the UN Convention regarding the age of protection. We should be supporting kids until they finish school, rather than rushing them out the door before they are ready. While we can hold out for legislative change, it may not come, and even if it does, it may be years away. There is so much we can do in the absence of amendments.
Essentially, we have a sequence of “encouraging get ready to leave care” otherwise felt by children and youth as a steady and consistent push over a series of steep cliffs. Not only should the ages of protection and extended care be changed but we need to change the philosophy of care. It is possible to move to a policy of treating long-term foster care as a permanency option for those children and youth who are not likely to go on to adoption. It is possible to proceed with adoption after Crown wardship ends. This requires a change in philosophy and eliminating “programming detachment”.
It would mean a shift:
FROM |
TO |
At 16 years …
Children and youth are advised (or find out) that they can leave care at 16.
The message to youth: “You’re 16. You need to get ready, in less than 2 years you have to be out on your own.”
OR:
If they do leave at 16, and terminate wardship they CANNOT re-enter the care system. (Which they could if they left at 18.)
The message to youth who “check out”: if you leave now you can never come back. Sorry. |
The concept of “emancipation” is not introduced. Young people stay with their foster family for at least another 5 years.
If youth leave care, then the door is open to return -- as it would be in a family.
The liability of having a youth “out of control of the society” is acknowledged, but is not the rationale for terminating wardship.
The message to youth:
Your place is with family. Focus on your studies, get a part-time job that will give you work experience, some spending money and hopefully help you decide what you want to do when you finish school.
If you mess up, you can come back. |
At 17 years …
Children and youth are recruited into independent living programs that “program” them to get ready to be out on their own by 17 years or certainly before their 18th birthday.
The message to youth: “Learn fast about how to manage on your own. You can’t stay here beyond your 18th birthday.” Child welfare programs are not about preparing for leaving care. They are about relationships – family, peers, and other positive relationships. Supports need to be provided to maintain the family-based placement. If in foster care, the foster parents are the “responsible adults” charged with caring -- as it would be in a family. |
Child welfare programs are not about preparing for leaving care. They are about relationships – family, peers, and other positive relationships. Supports need to be provided to maintain the family-based placement. If in foster care, the foster parents are the “responsible adults” charged with caring. As it would be in a family.
In terms of milestones, the future focus is not about transitioning out of care, it’s about educational achievement.
The message to youth:
Focus on school, balance work and studies. You are part of our family – be a contributing member. What do we need to do to help you succeed? Help with school? Dealing with relationships? With finding a part-time job? |
At 18 years ….
ECM allowance at $900+ becomes an incentive to disengage at 17 or 18 years old, if they have not done so already.
For youth who continue on with foster parents, they must negotiate a rate. The foster parent faces a significant reduction and youth often feel they are left begging to stay. Those that do are subjected to police reference checks.
For youth ECM rates are a mix of “freedom”, but also of being pushed out. It may seem like a lot of money, until they are out trying to manage rent, food, transportation, utilities, laundry, etc.
The research shows that when youth stay in foster care until 21, they do better – in school, jobs, health, relationships.3 |
Life in the family-based setting continues uninterrupted -- as it would be in a family. You don’t move because you had a birthday.
Foster parents continue to get the foster care rate, because they continue to parent. Youth are not offered ECM rates, and the idea of independence is not introduced while the youth is in high school. It’s about finishing basic education and exploring options for post-secondary, including trades, apprenticeship, community college or university.
The foster family plays a role in helping the youth to complete school, and plan for more independent lifestyle - as it would be in a family.
The concept of ECM is not completely eliminated, but is not the primary model of service.
The message to youth:
It’s important that you stay at home until you are ready to move out. At a minimum, this is your home until you are 21.
At 18, the status of Crown Wardship no longer exists. For many youth in care, the “access” with biological family prohibited adoption. At 18 years of age, this barrier no longer exists. At age 18, adoption is an option. |
18 - 21 years …
Few youth in care live in foster care while they attend post-secondary because most have already “aged out”. Only 42% of youth in care have graduated by the age of 20. 4
The small number of youth on ECM who do attend post-secondary “figure out” how to apply to post-secondary on their own and have few if any family contacts and/or supports during the school year, and during the holiday period. |
In the spirit of “family”, young people in care should be supported to go to school in the same way as a family would help out. If they attend college or university in their home town, the expectation is that they live at home (foster home). Foster parents would support their foster child (youth) at home. It would NOT be reasonable for the youth to have an apartment paid for them in the same town or city (most families could simply not afford that).
If youth go to school out of town and the cost and time of commuting is prohibitive, then foster parents would help the youth find a place to stay, and the ECM allowance would help pay the student’s living expenses. HELP – not completely pay. Before leaving home – just as in a family – the parents would help the student work out a budget, find an apartment, get a part-time job, and would help with applications for university, for OSAP etc.
The message to youth:
Education is important, as is learning to balance work and school. Education is very valuable. As a youth from the child welfare system, you have special help now through OSAP, and we will continue to support you. It is not entirely a “free ride”, you have to contribute too. |
| |
| Money became an incentive to leave care: $663 - 950/mo ECM and another $3300 through the OCBe. While it sounds like a lot of cash, it’s hardly enough to survive. |
The OCBe leaving care allowance is put in trust until the youth is finished high school and starts to plan their move to a more independent lifestyle.
The message to youth:
It’s a Trust Fund, as if it was created by a benevolent aunt or uncle to help open doors to new opportunities. |
| 21 = I have no support. |
The family relationship is established, firm and lasting. At 21, there is no termination. The door is open and youth can plan a semi-independent lifestyle; including a part-time job, school, and contributing to the family.
And, at 21 adoption is an option.5
The message to youth:
We are your family, we will support you. The door is open. |
The basic approach would be to change the message – one that currently is of cumulative rejection.
Children and youth in care fear the milestones that others celebrate. We start worrying them with "independence training" in their early teens. Youth tell us that they are preoccupied with these terminations, and fearful of being on their own. This interferes with them getting on with school, making friends, and building positive connections. One way to control life is to take charge – and many youth do this by leaving on “their terms”, almost always too early.
Another helpful analogy….
Imagine you have just been hired. Your employer says “Welcome aboard. We’re a tight team here – we do great work, we value you and we look forward to you giving us your best – and we will give you great opportunities. But by the way, you have a 4 month contract. And even if you are the best person we have ever had at our company we WILL be terminating your employment after 4 months. Yup –
that’s right – we want 110%. And we will terminate you.”
Your reaction? Dismay, despair, panic, anger, and … start looking for your next job NOW! Detach!!!
So here are some radical thoughts.
- What if we eliminated ECM as the primary program for youth in care, and used it only as a last resort?
- What if we refresh other aspects of foster care?
- We treat the fostering situation as the "permanency plan" and have young people stay in family-based care (the SAME family) until they are finished school.
- We assume that most are not finished high school until 20 (which is a bit optimistic based on current statistics which tell us that less than half have completed high school by the age of 20.)
- If youth need to do the "victory lap" like many other kids, they are still at "home" and not struggling to survive.
- What about stronger support to kin relationships, even if that is not the primary home?
- What about legal guardianship?
- What if we consider that adoption is an option – for older teens, and for your adults?
For a 14 year old in care, the idea of staying at home until 21 is a lot different than having to become independent at 17. Let’s think about what a good parent would do.
The legislation does not prescribe how CASs provide extended care, it just says they may extend care. Let’s focus on the “caring”.
About Author
Virginia Rowden is the Director of Social Policy and Mentor to the YouthCAN Program at the Ontario Association of Children’s Aid Societies.
1From the motion picture, “Shall We Dance” 2004. Miramax Films. Note adjustment “family” rather than “marriage”.
2 Youth Leaving Care: An OACAS Survey of Youth and CAS Staff. April 2006.
3See: When should the state cease parenting? Issue Brief, Mark E. Courtney, Amy Dworsky and Harold Pollack
Chapin Hall, December 2007.
4Gateway to Success: OACAS Survey of the Educational Status of Crown Wards March 2008.
5See: Patrick O’Brien, You Gotta Believe
http://www.yougottabelieve.org/
Next article: Emergent Literacy in Pre-School Children: Findings from the Ontario Looking After Children (OnLAC) Project |
