Rep. Harris & wife rehome adopted children Now with Exorcism

[SoybeanQueen]

You adopt a child and they are your child. Forever! Even when they don't behave. Even when you can't agree on how to parent them. Even when they have a disorder. They are your child!

Yep. There is absolutely no excuse for not being aware of attachment disorders and their associated behaviors these days. There is no guarantee of long-term good physical health, either. That's life. If you aren't prepared to handle whatever pops up, you should not adopt. Period.

Our children have RAD, behaviors that stem from neglect, possible alcohol and/or drug exposure, and neurological problems that have no known cause (and hence no treatment) at this time. Is it always easy? Nope. but that's what you sign up for when you become a parent.

If you watch the FB groups for adoption, though, you'll see time and time again that people see a beautiful child and are willing to overlook any red flags because they're more concerned about what they want versus what the child needs.

[SoybeanQueen]

"We were not prepared for children with severe, undiagnosed RAD."

You know who would be? A child molestor! That sounds like a good solution!

So is he claiming that DHS also allowed him to skip the classes required for foster/adopt parents? Because our classes were crystal clear on the RAD front.

[tropaka]

so, he stated that he gave the children to "trusted friends" - although he'd fired the father - so he didn't trust them with his business, but did trust them enough to care for two children? Huh?

[thoughtful]

He didn't sell the kids, the kids were a GIFT!! :?

True (as far as we know, anyway) -- I got carried away in my indignation.

I hope the full truth is finally sorted out. There is so much about this that is bizarre and frightening. Those poor children.

Oh, and . . . from the arktimes.com article, it's hard to figure out whether this woman was a "good guy," a "bad guy," or just a mess. They title the section of the article about her:

The murky role of Cecile Blucker, director of Children and Family Services at DHS.

I suspect it's pronounced differently, but all I could think of was:

[bBvideo 560,340:18qu4oxm]

[/bBvideo]

[2xx1xy1JD]

From that list of horrible "rehoming" ads that ILoveJellybeans posted:

We are looking into dissolving the adoption of our 4.5 year old son (we have had him since he was 3 weeks old), due to severe behavior problems associated with RAD. These behaviors are much worse around younger kids and we have a 3 year old bio. son. How do you go about doing so? Is an agency vs. attorney better, and approximate costs for both. We have been drained both emotionally and financially by trying to help him. If anyone looking to possibly adopt wants more info, feel free to ask.

How the hell is it possible for a child to have RAD if he was in their home from the age of 3 WEEKS?

[Miss M]

From that list of horrible "rehoming" ads that ILoveJellybeans posted:

How the hell is it possible for a child to have RAD if he was in their home from the age of 3 WEEKS?

I don't understand that AT ALL!! My youngest brother was adopted, he is 21 years younger than me, he was a RAD baby, his Mother never touched him in the six months she had him other than to change his diaper and stand next to the crib with a bottle stuck in his mouth. Yes, there were issues at first, he screamed if you put him down, for months, but once he knew he was loved and not one of us would leave him, well he just became a normal kid. He and his wife have their own daughter now (9 months old) and he could not be a better Dad if he tried, he loves her so much, as does his wife, my niece is over loved if anything!!

[doggie]

It sounds just an excuse to dump the kid.

[Mama Mia]

From that list of horrible "rehoming" ads that ILoveJellybeans posted:

How the hell is it possible for a child to have RAD if he was in their home from the age of 3 WEEKS?

Well, there's nothing in the criteria that says RAD absolutely has to be related to his being adopted. No matter how that awful woman is trying to place blame. Sounds like the difficulties in attachment come from her end!

[KateFowler]

Yep. There is absolutely no excuse for not being aware of attachment disorders and their associated behaviors these days. There is no guarantee of long-term good physical health, either. That's life. If you aren't prepared to handle whatever pops up, you should not adopt. Period.

Our children have RAD, behaviors that stem from neglect, possible alcohol and/or drug exposure, and neurological problems that have no known cause (and hence no treatment) at this time. Is it always easy? Nope. but that's what you sign up for when you become a parent.

If you watch the FB groups for adoption, though, you'll see time and time again that people see a beautiful child and are willing to overlook any red flags because they're more concerned about what they want versus what the child needs.

The effects of institutionalization, neglect, abuse and prenatal exposure to drugs/alcohol are known to anybody with more than four brain cells who occasionally watches the evening news -- there is ZERO excuse for not being familiar with any of the above if you're adopting. Especially since there are 1) mandatory adoption/foster care education classes, ie that must be completed BEFORE a kid is placed and 2) in the Harris case, everybody and their brother, including the girls' PREVIOUS foster parents told them about the girls history of abuse/neglect and advised them AGAINST adopting them. Social workers, the first guardian ad litem and the SECOND guardian ad litem who literally, in court, said "yesterday, lots of you [CPS social workers, staff, etc] advised against this adoption. What changed your mind so fast?". Harris allegedly pulled strings to expedite the adoption.

http://m.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/arch ... tin-harris

There ARE systems in place to stop idiots from adopting vulnerable kids they're clearly incapable of properly caring for -- but Harris threw a big enough strop to override many of them.

There's also a lot of TOTALLY MADE UP information about RAD out there!

Official symptoms of RAD on the Mayo Clinic website (note they do NOT include triangulating adults, not being "cuddly" on adoptive parents terms, obsession with blood/gore or destroying property:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... n-20032126

NOT OFFICIAL list of "attachment disorder" symptoms that include all of the above:

http://www.attachment.org/reactive-attachment-disorder/

(There's no such thing as "attachment disorder" in the DSMV... only RAD).

[SoybeanQueen]

The effects of institutionalization, neglect, abuse and prenatal exposure to drugs/alcohol are known to anybody with more than four brain cells who occasionally watches the evening news -- there is ZERO excuse for not being familiar with any of the above if you're adopting. Especially since there are 1) mandatory adoption/foster care education classes, ie that must be completed BEFORE a kid is placed

Yeah, that's why I said what I did. We went through all of those classes. We've been to many therapists and psychologists and other specialists who all agree on RAD (some of our kids are affected, no Mayo Clinic web diagnosis needed).

What I do believe is that this guy expected the little girls to be empty shells that could be filled with his perfect vision of family life. There was little concern for the girls. Just for the adults.

[SunnyAndrsn]

Thank you so much for all you did to help your foster children. You went out of your way to do whatever you could to help, and I wish things had been different.

The following is my opinion: I don't think Rep. Harris' foster children have RAD. Or, let's put it this way: I'm betting they don't. I think he found a diagnosis from Dr. Google and thinks it makes him look good to throw it around. After all, HE'S the victim here!

Again, my opinion. And my heart breaks for those victimized little girls.

I agree with you 100%. Having had children that truly did have RAD, and working day and night to keep them safe from themselves, I'm skeptical when I hear it thrown around so much too.

I never felt unsafe with my kids. Angry, frustrated, exasperated, tired, chaotic, stressed, on edge...yes, all at once and all the time. I worried more for my kids' safety from their own poor decisions/choices than my own.

The good news for my kids is this: Out of 18 children, 5 had RAD. Two ended up institutionalized. One of those two actually did try to kill one of my dogs. That was the ONLY time I ever felt "unsafe", but it wasn't for me, it was for my pet. The child was removed the next day, which was part of the plan as we were doing respite for him, but he did end up institutionalized. When I read stories bout Rep. Harris and adopters who re-home because they ALL have children like the one that tried to kill my dog. I just don't buy it. Those cases are the exception, not the rule.

Side note: The other child who was institutionalized was removed from our home after 2 years. I was at a breaking point. I felt like a total piece of shit calling his social worker telling him I couldn't do it anymore. He lasted in our home 2x as long as any other foster home. He came back to us after he turned 18, and we were able to have a reconciliation of sorts. He actually did get the help he needed, and is doing quite well. That helped my guilt a bit.

The rest of "our" kids are doing better than I ever expected, except for my son. He continues to struggle with drugs and alcohol, keeping a steady job, keeping a roof over his head. We would love to help him more, but if we give him anything he can sell, he will and he'll use.

[SunnyAndrsn]

Having 5 adopted kids with extraordinarily high needs special needs is, umm, less than ideal -- and is a place where some sort of federal standards for homestudies are desperately needed to save well-intentioned potential adopters from themselves, ie their own bad judgment.

Because unless those 5 kids with RAD are big sibling group (ie adopting them together so they can stay together makes sense), the social worker/judge/etc who signed off on placing so many high unrelated, high needs their license revoked. Any kid up for adoption has been ABANDONNED st least once and deserves the very best shot at a successful adoption. It is NOT in the child's best interest to be placed in an incredibly high risk situation!

There are a LOT of rehoming that probably could've been avoided simply by not letting adopters do STUPID THINGS, like:

- Lindsay Crappo SIMULTANEOUSLY adopting 5 (!) unrelated, out of birth order Haitian kids, on top of her 2 kids + 2 Foster kids. Two Haitians got rehomed, another sent to unlicensed "crisis respite" & many remaining kids were sexually abused by their siblings due to lack of supervision

Homeasoftplacetofall.blogspot.com/2014/07/the-friday-we-had-to-call-child.html

- Letting Annie Kitching adopt AGAIN after her a/daughter accused a/dad, a/brothers and foster brother of sexually abusing her; Foster son removed by CPS for cause; a/son committing suicide at 17; letting said Foster son move back in the day he turned 18 AND being on the MI CPS Bad Parent list.

Reformtalk.net/2012/11/06/how-could-you-hall-of-shame-russian-adoptee-death/

A lot of rehomings could be avoided by prohibiting high-risk adoptions (simultaneous afoption of unrelated kids, letting folks with 15 kids adopt a 16th, requiring the adopted kid to be home a FULL year before starting another adoption, out of birth order adoptions, etc) in the first place!

I completely agree with you. To clarify our situation, we fostered 18 children total over the course of 8 1/2 years. Our RAD children did not come to us all at once.

The situations you describe make me sick.

You stated: Any kid up for adoption has been ABANDONNED st least once and deserves the very best shot at a successful adoption.

Personally, I think that any child who has been abandoned this way should only be placed in a home where there is a full time parent at home, and NO other children. That's the kind of time and attention that a hurting child needs and deserves. It's too bad that this is completely unrealistic.

[momof2treasures]

A lot of the events don't sound logical but these parents are fundies right? Maybe they thought once they adopted the girls they could parent however they want. They may have thought implementing strict discipline would fix these girls problems. It didn't work , and things got worse. The article did say the older girl wasn't happy there because she was often confined to her room. I've noticed many of these families seem to think extreme discipline will solve a while host of issues that aren't truly disciplinary but psychological and emotional. How sad.

[ILoveJellybeans]

From that list of horrible "rehoming" ads that ILoveJellybeans posted:

How the hell is it possible for a child to have RAD if he was in their home from the age of 3 WEEKS?

http://www.attachment.org/reactive-attachment-disorder/

Im guessing these people were fundies?

It seems like a very fundie thing to do, because of their tendency to adopt purely for the sake of saving a child and converting them to Christianity and expecting them to be grateful and instantly become the perfect American child and forget about their past life. They also have extremely high standards for a child and punish normal childhood behaviour, and use lazy, punitive, fear based, self centred parenting.

Fundie parenting can cause RAD. Even in biological kids-I wouldn't be surprised if it turned up frequently in kids born to fundie families.

•Unwanted pregnancy

•Pre-birth exposure to trauma, drugs or alcohol

•Abuse (physical, emotional, sexual)

•Neglect (not answering the baby’s cries for help)

•Separation from primary caregiver (i.e. illness or death of mother, or severe illness or hospitalization of the baby, or adoption)

•On-going pain such as colic, hernia or many ear infections

•Changing day cares or using providers who don’t do bonding

•Moms with chronic depression

•Several moves or placements (foster care, failed adoptions)

•Caring for baby on a timed schedule or other self-centered parenting

[Jana814]

Thanks for more of think kind of information. It's sad that this is happening to these kids.

[Mama Mia]

Probably veering off-topic, but I'm falling down the rabbit hole of REactive Attachment Disorder. It seems like there Are a huge amount of strong feelings and differing opinions on what it is, when it's appropriate to be diagnosed, and especially forms of treatment.

For those of you with experience -- what are your thoughts?

[sparkles]

The more I read about these kinds of adoptions, the more disgusted I become. Many of us really aren't joking when we say that more care is taken when adopting a pet than it is with some of these children. Almost every animal rescue will foster a pet so they can assess the animal's temperament, making sure, for example, that it's okay around children or other pets. Criteria for potential adoptive families always address these and other needs very specifically. Before we adopted our greyhound (who was rehomed because the couple that had him first had to move to a place that didn't allow pets) we had to clear three references including one with our vet to make sure we took proper care of our other pets. The group also did two home visits, one to make sure our home and yard met their standards and one to check that we'd made the recommended fixes. On both visits they closely watched how our grey interacted with our then 5 cats, went with us on walks and generally observed the goings-on. After they cleared us and we brought our boy home, they checked in with us periodically to make sure all was okay. It was the same with our cats. A lot of care was taken to make sure it was a good fit all around. The one time one of our adoptions almost didn't work out was with a fledgling rescue organization that was clearly in the weeds. They had no background on any of the pets and were basically looking to unload them. Our adoption was pretty much a disaster and we almost had to rehome our girl because she was crazy aggressive and uncontrollable (I'm convinced that she was sedated at the adoption event because not once in the four years she's been with us has she EVER been that calm). We did eventually have a breakthrough and can't imagine what life would be without her, but she still has issues that will probably never go away and we've learned to work around them.

I wish these child collectors and the organizations that farm out these precious babies would take a cue from pet rescues and do even one iota of the work that's required to make sure a child's needs are fully assessed and that he or she is going to a loving home where the parents are fully aware, trained and capable of unconditional love even when it seems impossible. But to them, these children aren't human beings, but notches in the belt of souls won for Jesus. If their biological offspring are nothing more than faceless godly soldiers, with individuality and personality trained out of them from birth, then there's little hope for the fragile children given over to them with no regard to their needs.

It's really almost too much to comprehend.

[Four is Enough]

I'd just like to say that ANYONE who adopts a child and expects the child to be grateful is barking up the wrong tree.. what kid is naturally grateful? At least until that same child is out on its own and realizes the sacrifices the family has made for it to be part of it! Kids are kids! :lol:

[Delilah]

The effects of institutionalization, neglect, abuse and prenatal exposure to drugs/alcohol are known to anybody with more than four brain cells who occasionally watches the evening news -- there is ZERO excuse for not being familiar with any of the above if you're adopting. Especially since there are 1) mandatory adoption/foster care education classes, ie that must be completed BEFORE a kid is placed and 2) in the Harris case, everybody and their brother, including the girls' PREVIOUS foster parents told them about the girls history of abuse/neglect and advised them AGAINST adopting them. Social workers, the first guardian ad litem and the SECOND guardian ad litem who literally, in court, said "yesterday, lots of you [CPS social workers, staff, etc] advised against this adoption. What changed your mind so fast?". Harris allegedly pulled strings to expedite the adoption.

http://m.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/arch ... tin-harris

There ARE systems in place to stop idiots from adopting vulnerable kids they're clearly incapable of properly caring for -- but Harris threw a big enough strop to override many of them.

There's also a lot of TOTALLY MADE UP information about RAD out there!

Official symptoms of RAD on the Mayo Clinic website (note they do NOT include triangulating adults, not being "cuddly" on adoptive parents terms, obsession with blood/gore or destroying property:

http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-cond ... n-20032126

NOT OFFICIAL list of "attachment disorder" symptoms that include all of the above:

http://www.attachment.org/reactive-attachment-disorder/

(There's no such thing as "attachment disorder" in the DSMV... only RAD).

I was just about to post the article from the Arkansas Times when I saw you'd already done it. Here is an analysis of that article that goes through Harris'excuses point by point. http://www.arktimes.com/ArkansasBlog/ar ... tin-harris

So, plenty of people are calling harris out for distorting the truth. I'm so happy that the citizens of Arkansas aren't letting this guy off the hook.

[artdecades]

Here is another great article about what liars they are. Of course they are playing the persecuted Christian card to death. I have to quote one bit because the snark is too great.

he says that Cecile Blucker, the head of DHS’s Division of Children and Family Services, told him this and that another source inside DHS (who he again declined to identify) told his wife, Marsha, “this is what they plan for you… because of your husband’s belief system, they will charge you with abandonment. This is what they have planned for you.†He clarified that he meant that he was singled out “for my political beliefs,†apparently because he is that extremely rare thing, a rightwing fundamentalist Christian, which we suppose must be a persecuted minority in Arkansas.

http://wonkette.com/578911/girls-foster ... -sob-story

[Gingi1976]

Justin Harris and his wife disgust me with their holier-than-thou, "we're the victims" bullshit. But what disgusts me more than anything is that when the dusts settles nothing will happen to them. They may be reprehensible human beings, but they didn't break any laws. My guess is that he will retain both his elected office (his ego is too large to resign) and his chairmanship of the committee that oversees DHS is Arkansas.

And if he DOES resign, it will be after much prayer and contemplation because he's a christian being persecuted (gag).

Maybe I am too jaded (both my mom and husband are social workers), but the Harris' never would have done this to biological children. You rehome a dog. . . not a child. These girls were never more than political/religious props and when the going got tough the Harris' got out. Plain and simple.

[Idolatry]

Reminds me of the PP's sermon about the biblical consequences for failing for the commandment to honor thy father and mother (Jan 2013 if you need some guidance from the faithful word). "For every one that curseth his father or his mother shall be surely put to death." Leviticus for the win, fools. DEATH PENALTY to those reprobate disobedient sinner girls transgressing the commandment of god. It's the bible, yo.

I have a feeling this isn't over for this guy. This might be just the beginning for his "great injustice."

[Delilah]

So it seems Mr. Harris has a history of crying persecution. He claimed that having to shift religious education to after-school hours was discriminating against his pupils/families. http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026323414 (link not broken because I don't think they'll care)

He got in trouble for violating the law about using public funds for religious education.

edited to ask - Does anybody even want to enroll their kids in his preschool now? I know I wouldn't.

[nelliebelle1197]

Justin Harris and his wife disgust me with their holier-than-thou, "we're the victims" bullshit. But what disgusts me more than anything is that when the dusts settles nothing will happen to them. They may be reprehensible human beings, but they didn't break any laws. My guess is that he will retain both his elected office (his ego is too large to resign) and his chairmanship of the committee that oversees DHS is Arkansas.

And if he DOES resign, it will be after much prayer and contemplation because he's a christian being persecuted (gag).

Maybe I am too jaded (both my mom and husband are social workers), but the Harris' never would have done this to biological children. You rehome a dog. . . not a child. These girls were never more than political/religious props and when the going got tough the Harris' got out. Plain and simple.

Can I get an AMEN up in here?

[dianapavelovna]

http://www.attachment.org/reactive-attachment-disorder/

Im guessing these people were fundies?

It seems like a very fundie thing to do, because of their tendency to adopt purely for the sake of saving a child and converting them to Christianity and expecting them to be grateful and instantly become the perfect American child and forget about their past life. They also have extremely high standards for a child and punish normal childhood behaviour, and use lazy, punitive, fear based, self centred parenting.

Fundie parenting can cause RAD. Even in biological kids-I wouldn't be surprised if it turned up frequently in kids born to fundie families.

Please do not trust any information on that website (attachment.org). It is the website of Nancy Thomas, a proponent of dangerous holding therapies and cruel "attachment therapy." She has no credentials as any kind of medical or mental health professional and no academic background. She used to be a dog trainer and has stated that she uses some of the same techniques on children as she did with dogs. Some choice quotes:

I have had instances where a kid is so out of control that they refuse to stay. When that happens, I will sit on the child. I have had to do this with dogs as well, and they are generally more dangerous with their teeth and claws than children. … I pick a good book and read while I sit on a child and that really seems to upset them because they feel that I should be miserable like they are.

A mature enough child in good weather might need to walk home. It is safest to follow at a distance in the car. Or the child could do push-ups on the side of the road until the specified amount is done correctly.

In the beginning, your child should learn to ask for everything. They must ask to go to the bathroom, to get a drink of water, EVERYTHING. When it starts to feel like they must ask to breathe, you are on the right track.

t is the child’s job to make the parents happy with the child.

These are from various sources; you can see the full citations here. She is right up there with the abusive fundies we talk about.

Second - she often uses the terms "attachment disorder" and "reactive attachment disorder" interchangably. There is no such diagnosis as "attachment disorder." What she describes as RAD is not the true clinical diagnosis of RAD that appears in the DSM V. KateFowler posted a Mayo Clinic link upthread that gave a good overview of the clinical, evidence-based diagnosis of RAD. I would post the information directly out of the DSM, but my copy is on loan to a friend. The list of symptoms of "RAD" posted on Thomas' website have nothing to do with the clinical diagnosis of RAD, except for "Indiscriminately affectionate with strangers" and "Inappropriately demanding & clingy." More than a few of them are completely subjective and ridiculous ("Parents appear hostile and angry" - how can the actions of two other people be a "symptom" of something in a third?)

There is a whole community that has sprung up around this definition and symptoms of "RAD," promoted by Thomas and various others. What they talk about is not RAD as defined by the mental health and medical communities. They often promote harmful and cruel therapies and discipline methods. Google Candace Newmaker if you're curious and have a strong stomach.

Let me be clear - I am not saying that the behaviors described are not real or scary and difficult to manage or in need of treatment. But they are not RAD. The explanation could be any number of things depending on the circumstances of the child. The child may meet the criteria for conduct disorder. Reactive attachment disorder is rare, and its symptoms do not include violence, aggression, firesetting, cruelty to animals, etc. Too often the term seems to be thrown around as a catchall diagnosis for children with a history of abuse/neglect/time in foster care and behavioral problems. Calling it RAD and using Nancy Thomas-style "treatment" (essential oils, anyone?) is not the answer.