James Wood’s mother struggled with addiction and he was often at a loss because he didn’t know what day or month it was. “I didn’t understand how time worked,” he said.
When James was 14, his mother died of pneumonia and he entered the California foster care system. As a minor with a deceased parent and a disability, James was eligible for federal benefits totaling $780 per month, some of which his mother had accumulated during the years she worked as a nurse.
But James never received the benefits. According to James and his adoptive father Wayne Stidham, the government received the money instead.
According to child rights advocates and congressional researchers, it is a longstanding practice in many states or counties to apply for state benefits for foster children, often without their knowledge, and then use the money to cover some of the costs of their care.
Each year, approximately 27,000 foster children qualify for these benefits because they have either lost a parent or have a disability. There are currently approximately 390,000 children in foster care in the United States.
“This is wrong,” said James, now 16 and living in Grass Valley, California, in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. “Foster children could make plans for that money.”
Advocates say benefits should be deferred to provide the child with additional resources, such as summer camps or art classes. And if the child leaves foster care, the money could be used to finance college or provide a deposit for renting an apartment.
Some state and county officials say the federal funds are used to benefit the children and that if money is left over, the child receives the funds when he or she leaves foster care.
A spokeswoman for the Placer County, Calif., Health and Human Services Department, which oversaw James’ care, declined to comment on his situation but said the county was required by the state to apply for federal funding and use it for the “welfare.” of the individual child, including food, shelter, clothing, medical care and personal comfort items.”
But the practice, previously exposed by advocates at the Children’s Advocacy Institute and journalists from The Marshall Project and NPR, is increasingly being challenged by the courts, Congress and Biden administration officials. Many states have also changed their laws to ensure that at least some of the children’s money is protected.
“We’re seeing government agencies trying to fund themselves from the children they’re supposed to serve,” said Amy Harfeld, national policy director for the Children’s Advocacy Institute, which works to improve the quality of life and protection of foster youth. “It’s outrageous.”
In a statement this week, the Social Security Administration said a child’s federal benefits must be spent on his or her “current needs and support” and that if money is left over, the state must “set aside the remaining funds for the child’s future use.” ”
The agency added that it recently issued a letter reminding state foster care systems “how to use and receive SSA benefits and to offer them assistance in complying with our requirements.”
Ms. Harfeld, who began pushing for a change in these practices 15 years ago, said that in many cases states never skimp on the money.
She added that children whose federal benefits are collected by the state receive the same care benefits as those who do not receive those benefits.
“There is no such thing as nursing care plus,” said Ms. Harfeld. “The only difference is that some children will be charged a fee for care, while all other children will have their care paid for by the state.”
The practice reflects the isolated methods states have used to pay foster families in the past. In the 19th century, a mix of private and religious groups, as well as some government agencies, provided residential care services for foster children.
Even when foster care was administered by state and county governments in the 20th century, federal policymakers were reluctant to allocate too much money to these systems for fear that some people might become foster parents just for the money, Catherine Rymph said , a dean and professor at the University of Missouri who wrote a book on the history of foster care.
That has left a system that is overwhelmed in many places, Ms. Rymph said. “It is so poorly funded that states will claw back as much money as they can.”
But children say their money — especially donations from a deceased parent — shouldn’t be used to prop up the system. When Anthony Jackson was 12, his mother died of a heart attack in a motel room where he and his siblings had been living.
He considered his mother a “powerhouse,” a fixture in her St. Paul, Minn., neighborhood who drove a city-operated shuttle bus that took elderly people to doctor’s appointments and the grocery store. While she worked, she paid into Social Security, which made her children eligible for survivor benefits.
After his mother died, Mr. Jackson, now 20, moved between different relatives before being placed in foster care in 2017.
While in foster care, Mr. Jackson learned from his former girlfriend’s mother that children with a deceased parent may be eligible for survivor benefits. But when he checked with the Social Security Administration, Mr. Jackson was told that the state was receiving the benefits on his behalf.
“That was something that belonged to her and I didn’t receive it,” Mr. Jackson said.
He said the money could have helped him attend an art school in Savannah, Georgia, that he was interested in but couldn’t afford. Mr. Jackson attended the local college in St. Paul but is no longer enrolled.
In a statement, the Minnesota Department of Human Services said that when the foster care system applies for services on behalf of a child, the money is not used “to fund the state’s child welfare system at large.” The statement also noted that a new state law passed this year says the money “may only be used for the care of the child.” The state will also require that children be notified when the state receives federal benefits on their behalf.
Across the country the tide is changing. More than a dozen states, counties and cities have adopted new rules or enacted laws requiring that at least some of the benefits remain with children. In addition, bills have been introduced in more than a dozen other states that would mandate financial protection or require children to be notified of their benefits.
In a series of congressional hearings in March, Social Security Administration Commissioner Martin O’Malley indicated that the agency may need more than current rules to ensure that states defer and keep some of the benefits.
At one of the hearings, Senator Elizabeth Warren, a Democrat from Massachusetts, said she “nearly fell out of her chair” when she was told about the practice.
“It’s simply not right to use the services of some of our most vulnerable children to fund other parts of state government,” she told Mr. O’Malley.
In a 2021 report, the Congressional Research Service said states claimed $179 million in federal benefits owed to about 27,000 foster children in 2018, a relatively small amount of total funding for foster children.
James Wood remembers his mother, who died when he was 14, giving him three pieces of advice: Don’t do drugs; Don’t go down the same path as them. and start making career plans in your first year of high school. “It really stuck with me,” he said.
James, who is in ninth grade and was adopted last November, has chosen a career in law enforcement. He will honor his mother’s wishes and wants the government to respect the intent of the survivor benefits.
“If you ask anyone, I think it’s very disrespectful to promise someone something and then take it away,” James told a state legislative committee in Sacramento last month. “Especially when it’s a child with a deceased parent.”
Source link
2024-05-26 17:47:16
www.nytimes.com
