Permanent custody of foster child (family) vs adoption?

The state will not FORCE an older child to reunify if the child does not wish to do so. The standard age for a child to speak for him/herself in Court is 12. (Children as young as 7 have been allowed to do so if the Court finds that the child is competent to do so.)

I think since it is a family placement at an older age, the Court is doing the right thing. This way, the child has both permanency (guardianship is an extremely arduous task to overturn) WITHIN his biological family and is able to retain his original identity etc. This child is old enough to also have feelings towards and memories about his biological parents. Not JUST bad ones. I spent several years working with abused and neglected kids as a GAL and almost all of them STILL LOVED THEIR PARENTS! They had good and loving memories too. Not to mention bonds. Many of them wanted to "go home". (BTW, of course an 8 yo loves being with his same age male cousins! :) Why wouldn't he?! But please remember, it has only been a year and he is 8, he may not feel the same when they are all teens!)

Since he is with his Mother's sister, the Courts most likely assume that he will be continuing to have some visitation/exposure. (In other words, the Court most likely does NOT see these parents as a major threat or the Aunt would not have custody at all or would have been ordered to not associate with her sister.) You don't mention what kind of physical abuse nor the drug, but there is a big difference between prescription meds, cannabis and meth (they often have separate penalties as they are viewed as different levels/types drug abuse/addiction) or "inappropriate discipline" vs "physical assault" (both are considered "physical abuse") so I am assuming the Court does not think these parents would be a threat.

IF (<---big if) his parents get their act together and can manage to prove to a judge that they are willing to do what it takes to parent their child, HE should be able to choose where he wants to be. Why should he have that right taken from HIM via adoption?

I think this is exactly the kind of situation that kinship guardianship is FOR. This is a child who is able to be in safe, kinship care during an extended period of family crisis and will have both his identity and rights kept in tact. I don't think you should worry - at least not now. I do hope this makes you feel a bit better.

ETA: What worries me is that people seem to have such little regard for these children's rights or feelings. Everyone would rather err on the side of the extreme rather that allow a child to decide for themselves at an appropriate age what HE or SHE wants as their permanent situation. Children are still seen as chattel rather than human beings. :(

Yeah, this is highly unusual, and a really terrible arrangement. The state needs to either reunify within a reasonable time or TPR, not just drag their heels indefinitely.

So the parents get to decide when (if ever) to work on their plan, and the child just sits waiting, knowing that any moment, even years later, his life can be turned upside down? It's pretty ridiculous that a social worker sees this as a good idea.

Parents who work hard on their case plans and make their homes safe should get their children back. Parents who don't work their plans should have their rights terminated. Parenting is not optional when they feel like it, and kids aren't just objects in storage till they're in the mood. If they need more time to work a plan, sure... but if they don't want to bother with a plan? No way.

It probably is partly because of his age, and partly because they know family is more likely to accept such a weird arrangement because of the threat of losing the boy to strangers. TPR trials and the resulting appeals are expensive for the state, and involve a lot of hours of work for the caseworkers, GALs, lawyers, and judges. It sounds like the department of children and families is taking the path of least resistance by doing nothing, and throwing the boy under a bus in the process.

This is totally unacceptable, and probably isn't even legal-- so your friend shouldn't let it slide. Can she go over the caseworker's head and talk to a supervisor? This is definitely an ASFA violation, so the law is on your friend's side. The state is required to provide permanency within a reasonable timeframe. Allowing the parents to retain parental rights without working their plan and ignoring their parental responsibilities till they feel like taking them up again is not permanency in any sense of the word.

I believe that they chose that route because he is with a family member. It might also represent some type of other problem where the worker is not sure the court would grant termination of parental rights. I have seen this done----permanent custody where the child is a teen---not often with a young child as this.

Nichols, you are right, but THAT is not the problem,one of the birth parents is a child of the asker, and if he or she is still around, but incapable of parenting, such an anti-birth parent measure might be seen by the children themselves as an act of hostility. Oh, and you go and try as a teen to explain in highschool that you came from your (legal) sister's womb or so... Adoption of children by their grandparents is a problematic issue, which is the reason that is outlawed in some jurisdictions.

I personally have seen where parents have really stepped up and done their part and changed however the abusive part is what has me a little disturbed. Parents who are abusive have many problems that need to be dealt with and has ALOT of work to prove they can treat their children the way they should. I feel this point the child should stay where he is safe and likes it. If the adoptive family is still wanting him and the child wants to stay I say heck let him stay. The child will never forget what happen to him and its not fare to not let his feelings and wants to be heard. Yes even at 8. There is soo much that could happen and I have seen that too. My brother and his wife adopted 2 twin boys who mom was wanting them but she couldn't prove herself and has a mental disorder and she neglected them to sit forever in their car seats and allow the cat to poop on them and not clean it up. She might not have physically abused them but to me that is a form. The boys are doing great and loving their life but does suffer some separation anxiety and stress from their mom. My family is blessed to be able to have the resources to get them the help they need because their mom also drunk while in utero. All situations is different but in this one. I feel the 8 needs to stay and let him have the choice when the legal age is to pick. Hopefully the parents have cleaned themselves up to repair their relationship.