Can i get custody of my niece that i have fostered for the last 5 months?

I am going through the same thing. My aunt had 4 kids, and 1 lived with his grandma, 1 lived with her friend, 1 was adopted and the youngest is living with my family. He is 4 and we have had him for about 1 month now. His dad is in jail and we have no clue where his mom is. My parents and I do not want him to go back with his parents because he has told us bad stories about his parents. We would like to adopt him someday but not sure what's going to happen if he goes back to his parents. Hope you do get custody! Good luck to you.

So if DHS doesn't terminate parental rights they are corrupt---that's a new twist here. No they are not going to terminate at 6 months---maybe a year and six months IF mom 'doesn't get her act together." No you have NO chance to get custody of your niece over her mother. If the court and family services decide mom has done her service plan then she gets her child back---as should be.

No you have no chance to get her back! NOT if the court decides Mom has done what she was supposed to do. At six months in care NO agency has enough grounds to terminate parental rights.

It just depends on what state you live in as the time requirements vary from state to state. Nothing will be decided until the child is at least a year old. This mom still has a chance to get her life turned around. I've witnessed this many times as a foster parent. If at some point the court and DHS feels the mom has made the necessary progress then and ONLY then will All the children go home. DHS will continue to monitor the children after they go HOME for a period of 6 months to a year. If the children are removed again the agency should contact each and every family to see if they will take the children back again. AT any time if the parental rights are terminated the foster parent Should have first chance to adopt that child------the child will not be removed from the present foster home and placed with a stranger to adopt. Foster parents have many legal rights and the court will uphold your rights. I hope you live in a state that gives foster parents rights and responsibilities---mine does.

Nothing to add really except DHS doesn't make these decisions. Courts do, based on specific documentation and legal proceedings. DHS is JUST a government agency that has to follow very specific rules and proceedures, and have to maintain a "quota" of children in care, else they risk loosing state funding. It's the same for them as any other govt office. That's the ugly side that nobody talks about, but "quotas" can stall reasonable actions if the quota is being met -- or it can make CPS agents more aggressive, or less aggressive. It all comes down to the "stats". Seems cold, but it is what it is.

If they seem cold and heartless people - it's because the system has told them to be cold and heartless people. I know when I asked my SW about a career in social work, she laughed and said my heart is too big, and I wouldn't last long. DHS workers are generally numb to circumstances. It's the only way they can do their job and maintain their own sanity.

My TPR didn't occur until 4 YEARS after I went into FC. My mom was giving plan after plan after plan and failed on every single one. It wasn't until she ended up in jail did a judge finally order the TPR.

Iowa, I don't mean to hijack your thread, but I think Teresa gave you the right answer.

I would like some of the anti-adoption folks out there to look at the situation Teresa described for a child. It is about the same in my state. In that situation, you end up with a 22-month-old child whose mother's rights were finally terminated. If the foster home she is in does not want to adopt (I am a foster mom BTW who has declined to adopt all 3 precious, perfect babies I have kept - my kids are grown and don't want to start over - there are LOTS of us doing foster care) then she is placed for adoption. At 22 months old, she loses everything she has ever known.

Wouldn't she have been in a better situation if her mother had just relinquished her rights? Placed her for private adoption at birth? If the mother KNEW her situation was so bleak that the state could easily take her baby (or in fact as here, already had) and she had so little resources she would never be able to get her back, wouldn't she have done better to place her baby in an adoptive home rather than let her languish in foster care for 22 months while the state played the court system out and then have the poor innocent child lose everything she knows?

Add: And in fact, if a mom loses her child in the foster care system, she will likely never see her again because DHS doesn't do open adoptions. If she had placed for adoption at birth, everything was on the table, the child could always know what happened and why.

ADD: Cricket: Do you believe that that's a good situation? In a year and a half if mother hasn't gotten her life back together, that the child should be placed for adoption? The child is 18 months old, and could quite conceivably be placed with strangers. Wouldn't it have been better for that child if her her mom had placed for adoption in the first place rather than have to go to strangers at 18 months old? (PS Don't yell at me...I'm asking your opinion, not fighting you).

Many states are passing laws that mandate that family gets a chance to adopt children no matter how long they've been with the foster parent, whether the bio parent has voluntary relinquished rights. As you are your neice's foster mother and aunt, I would guess you would have no problem adopting her when and if rights are terminated with her biological mother. I would check your states laws and statutes to be sure though.

Right now I am facing the opposite situation as you. I am a bio mom who cannot care for her children ( I know that will probably get me a lot of negative comments on here) who is trying to get my family who are complete strangers to my children to step aside so the foster parents can adopt before I relinquish my rights.

In NY, the child must live away from the parent for 12mo before that caregiver can seek custody without the parent transferring custody voluntarily. If mom is saying no one will see the baby again, it sounds like she does want her back. If mom didn't want her daughter, she would be talking about letting you still see her whenever you want or being baby's godmother. No matter how corrupt you believe DHS, they will not send a child home if mom has not made efforts to keep baby safe in her care.

Also in NY, TPR's aren't even considered until 12mo, or filed until 15mo. AND the judges in my county always grant parents a 6mo adjournment before actually terminating. Unless a parent surrenders, it is a 22mo process. This is not because DHS is corrupt, but because the law it written to protect the rights of biofamilies, not necessarily the rights of the child. DHS is very honest about it's goal- which is always reunification. The caseworker telling you they are considering a TPR at 6mo makes me think they are not planning on reunifying anytime soon.

if your sister has done what has been asked in order to get her children back, then the courts have got to give her the children back. What grounds do you have to try and get custody if she has done nothing wrong in the courts eyes. The courts always want the mother to have her children. that is why they give them a chance.

talk to your lawyer, you can fight for custody! im sure if you can prove that your sister is not doing what she should be doing and that you are what is best for the baby, then you can get custody of her!

it will be up to the courts