Rembis Fam: 11 kids, CPS, antivax, homeschool, CPS

[Koala]

Going to put this under spoiler:

Spoiler

Okay, so I am just seeing the picture of the dry erase board with the message written by her 15 year old.  It looks like something a small child wrote.  The level of educational neglect here is just absolutely stunning.  How can a mother allow this to happen?

The picture looks like the daughter is writing it, but if you read the comments, Claire clarifies that it was written by her 15 year old son.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209194668416525&set=pb.1615059924.-2207520000.1484327040.&type=3&theater

 

 

[JermajestyDuggar]

At this point, I am just really hoping that these children can be adopted as 2 or 3 family groups but I honestly doubt it. Not many foster parents can take in 3-4 siblings at once in the same area. So they will most likely get spread apart. The older ones in group homes and the littler ones in a few families. It's just so fucking sad.

[Anonymousguest]

22 hours ago, DaisyD said:

Does anyone know, off hand, how long this will go on before the kids are adoptable? How many of them will still be young enough?

In my state, after the initial hearing with the judge that outlines what the parents need to be doing to get their kids back, visitation, etc, not much else happens in the first 6m. The law is that at 15m a permanency plan must be in place. At this point they'll try to know whether they are working towards permanent placement in foster care/adoption, or reunification. If the parents are still making reasonable efforts and progress towards getting their children back they will keep getting more time. If not, they will start moving towards termination of parental rights, which can often take many more months. And making reasonable effort can man just about anything. One friend of mine had a baby taken from a meth house, and the parents were both in jail. They both had separate cases, but termination didn't even start until the second one was out of jail and could have a chance at getting her back. I have friends who have had foster kids in their home for as long as 4 yrs before they were adoptable. Assuming TX is similar, these kids could just be getting started. Any child under 18 is "young enough" to be adopted, but all of these kids are past the she that are generally chosen for adoption, and all will be another year or more older of it happens. 

I find it sad that some here are hoping for termination of parental rights. Evidence is clear that kids do better being raised in their family of origin, and should only be permanently removed from their home when there is no other option. The emotional trauma a child experiences being removed from their parents isn't over come by enough food or better living conditions. I am guessing that this is even more difficult when siblings are separated.  Reunification should be the goal if at all possible. 

Hopefully these parents are working towards their goals of getting their kids back. Even just showing up for all the visitations would be enough in my county to have that permanency plan lean towards reunification, even if things were going slowly. 

[Jencendiary]

1 hour ago, Anonymousguest said:

 Evidence is clear that kids do better being raised in their family of origin, and should only be permanently removed from their home when there is no other option.

 

So, what do you propose to do with children who are neglected in every way possible by parents who are doing NOTHING to regain custody? I'd have cut them loose months ago and tried to find permanent placements for these children who need so much support  to get to some semblance of normality.

[Childless]

1 hour ago, Anonymousguest said:

In my state, after the initial hearing with the judge that outlines what the parents need to be doing to get their kids back, visitation, etc, not much else happens in the first 6m. The law is that at 15m a permanency plan must be in place. At this point they'll try to know whether they are working towards permanent placement in foster care/adoption, or reunification. If the parents are still making reasonable efforts and progress towards getting their children back they will keep getting more time. If not, they will start moving towards termination of parental rights, which can often take many more months. And making reasonable effort can man just about anything. One friend of mine had a baby taken from a meth house, and the parents were both in jail. They both had separate cases, but termination didn't even start until the second one was out of jail and could have a chance at getting her back. I have friends who have had foster kids in their home for as long as 4 yrs before they were adoptable. Assuming TX is similar, these kids could just be getting started. Any child under 18 is "young enough" to be adopted, but all of these kids are past the she that are generally chosen for adoption, and all will be another year or more older of it happens. 

I find it sad that some here are hoping for termination of parental rights. Evidence is clear that kids do better being raised in their family of origin, and should only be permanently removed from their home when there is no other option. The emotional trauma a child experiences being removed from their parents isn't over come by enough food or better living conditions. I am guessing that this is even more difficult when siblings are separated.  Reunification should be the goal if at all possible. 

Hopefully these parents are working towards their goals of getting their kids back. Even just showing up for all the visitations would be enough in my county to have that permanency plan lean towards reunification, even if things were going slowly. 

No one wishes kids permanently loose their family, but there's a point where acknowledging its in their best interest is needed.  How long should a child's life be kept in upheaval and uncertainty?  When do they deserve stability instead of chaos even if it's with a new family?  If these people were doing what they should've been doing for their kids, they never would have been taken.  Both are capable adults, one has a college degree.  Six months was plenty long enough to find a job and secure acceptable housing.  Why are they both still unemployed and homeless wasting what little money they had on a vacation?  It's apparent that they're just fine letting their children languish in foster care without making any effort to get them back and offer normalcy.  That doesn't demonstrate a desire to parent these children.  Perhaps someone who is prepared to give them what they need should have the opportunity.

[Carm_88]

I think after a certain point, you have to look at what is for the best interest for the kids. I don't think that these parents will change, they are woefully behind in school, they were digging in the garbage for food. Why would any person want to send them back to that? 

[Mercer]

3 hours ago, Anonymousguest said:

I find it sad that some here are hoping for termination of parental rights. Evidence is clear that kids do better being raised in their family of origin, and should only be permanently removed from their home when there is no other option. The emotional trauma a child experiences being removed from their parents isn't over come by enough food or better living conditions. I am guessing that this is even more difficult when siblings are separated.  Reunification should be the goal if at all possible. 

I agree that it would be best if the Rembis parents could get it together, complete their plan, and parent their children safely in the family home.

Here's the thing, though: Although I can't find a confirmed date when the children were removed, the Rembis family claims it was July 7th of 2015 - so it was probably approximately a year and a half ago. During that time, the Rembis parents have not given any indication that they are working any part of their plan. It's possible that they have made progress that for whatever reason they haven't documented, but based on what they share with the public they appear to be doing nothing other than trying to argue why they shouldn't have to follow the requirements, criticizing and undermining their children's providers, and recently using their resources to go on vacation rather than improve their living situation. I would also point out that this is the family's third CPS incident, so there has been ample time to assess their mistakes and get back on track.

The writing is on the wall here. It's not that I want the parents to fail. It's that the parents are already choosing not to succeed, and dragging out the breakdown of a family indefinitely is not beneficial to the children. The parents were not raising the children in safe conditions and show no intention of changing course. Ultimately it appears that they just can't or won't do this, and their foot-dragging is just making it harder on the children.

If I woke up tomorrow and read that the Rembis parents had turned it around and made major progress, and were getting the children back as a result, that would absolutely be the best outcome and I would be thrilled. Absent any progress, though, simply holding the children in limbo is not beneficial. It has been my experience working in children's mental health that kids can bounce back better from almost any setback than they can from seemingly endless periods of uncertainty.

Yes, termination of parental rights would be awful for these kids. But if that outcome is inevitable, better now than after stringing them along for another year.

[Jess]

Not that I like defending them but it wasn't that long ago. The July 2015 date was the first time there were foster care for a short period of time and the judge returned the children. The new removal was in August or September of this year. 

[scribble]

I have adopted three kids from foster care. In my experience parents get years to work on their case plan. If they do nothing except for visits, it drags on even longer... it took three years before parents' rights were terminated for one of my kiddos.

The federal "guideline" is that the goal for the kids should change to adoption once they've been in foster care for 15 out of the last 22 months. (But parents can still work on their plans even at that point.)  All three of the cases for my kids went much, much longer that that.

Given the sheer number of kids, I wouldn't be surprised if the case goes on even longer. In my state, at least, they will not terminate parents rights and make kids legal orphans unless an adoptive resource has been found. That will probably be tough to do, even splitting kids up, especially for the  older kids.

Truly a mess... my heart breaks for everything those kids have gone through. I hope they are getting services and resources to help them.

[Mercer]

27 minutes ago, Jess said:

Not that I like defending them but it wasn't that long ago. The July 2015 date was the first time there were foster care for a short period of time and the judge returned the children. The new removal was in August or September of this year. 

Hm... I think you're right. Their Facebook page is extremely misleading about that, but that would explain the lack of confirmation from reliable sources.

They probably have time left before the ASFA deadline, then. So nothing will likely have happened at their hearing.

It doesn't really change my opinion of the likely outcome of the case, though, since they have multiple CPS issues dating back to at least 2006 (possibly earlier) and they don't seem to be working their plan. It just means the parents have more time left to drag their feet.

[DaisyD]

@Anonymousguest, like the others said, I don't hope for the permanent breakup of a family. My only hope is for some kind of stability for those children. Since it appears that the parents don't care/want to work their plan, it is my hope that the most expedient path to that stability will occur. 

[mirele]

If it's any consolation, in a normal world, William Rembis wouldn't get into any law school with the future of his children hanging over his head. Alas, these are not normal times for law schools (as someone referenced above, look up "third tier toilets") and if the guy could round up the funding and had a halfway decent LSAT score, he probably could get in somewhere.

[MakeitSew]

Where I live, parents who have their children taken into state custody have to pay child support. Are the Rembis parents contributing at all to the upkeep of their children? I just can't understand how a father can justify school expenses, vacation and travel, etc. with so many children currently being held in foster care. 

[DaisyD]

They're supposed to pay $100 in child support each month, I *think*.

[acheronbeach]

9 hours ago, mirele said:

If it's any consolation, in a normal world, William Rembis wouldn't get into any law school with the future of his children hanging over his head. Alas, these are not normal times for law schools (as someone referenced above, look up "third tier toilets") and if the guy could round up the funding and had a halfway decent LSAT score, he probably could get in somewhere.

I wasn't asked any questions about my family situation when I applied to law school.  I'm Canadian but I was accepted to American law schools. 

[Mercer]

3 hours ago, acheronbeach said:

I wasn't asked any questions about my family situation when I applied to law school.  I'm Canadian but I was accepted to American law schools. 

Most schools (and employers, etc.) nowadays will do at least a quick internet search on potential candidates to see if there's anything that could potentially embarrass the school or business. The top search engine hits on William Rembis refer to child neglect. He wouldn't have to disclose it for them to be aware that he could be a liability to the school's reputation.

[CrazyLurkerLady]

My heart is broken for these children. They deserve so much better. I don't think there's a happy outcome, no matter what happens. I don't doubt that reunification is not happening because the parents just plain don't want to. I don't know if it's because they like the freedom without children, because they want the notoriety, or because they just want to be right more than they want their kids. I wish they'd just give up and sign over the rights so the kids can get some stability, education, and love.

[acheronbeach]

Not in Ontario. It's a simple LSAT/grades matrix for almost all the law schools.  It's so predictable that there's a website where applicants track acceptances so they know when/if they'll get in. 

Now, articling/hiring... that's a different story.  

[MarblesMom]

40 minutes ago, CrazyLurkerLady said:

My heart is broken for these children. They deserve so much better. I don't think there's a happy outcome, no matter what happens. I don't doubt that reunification is not happening because the parents just plain don't want to. I don't know if it's because they like the freedom without children, because they want the notoriety, or because they just want to be right more than they want their kids. I wish they'd just give up and sign over the rights so the kids can get some stability, education, and love.

This applies to the Ns as well.  Although they are reunited, things don't seem to be improving.

[Four is Enough]

My limited experience with foster children and social workers tells me that SOME families, when they get their next court date, simply wait for the next court date. They seem to view the time without their child as a "waiting" time. IF they do any of the prescribed actions, it is often too little too late, but then the excuses begin. "I was trying to get a job and I couldn't get to classes, I don't have a car, my mother won't give me bus money to come to supervised visitation," as they sit there fidgeting with their cigarettes, etc. They really do seen to be surprised that the children don't automatically come back to them.

This is MY opinion, based on MY experiences. If it were MY kids, and Mr. Four and I had to jump through some major home study hoops in order to get our home studies completed for the Four, I'd be out there doing what I needed to do FIRST.. not shopping, or buying cigarettes, or doing whatever it is that these yahoos do to spend their time.

[Antimony]

So, I was either sniffed out and kicked out of the closed group for the Rembis family or they got rid of the page. 

[Howl]

Public Rembis Fam page still comes up for me, but I didn't join the closed group.  Tweedledum and Tweedledee posted from the IHOP Conference in Kansas on Dec. 30; not much else, and zip about the kids on Rembis Fam fb. 

[Carm_88]

2 hours ago, Antimony said:

So, I was either sniffed out and kicked out of the closed group for the Rembis family or they got rid of the page. 

If they did get rid of it, I wonder what that means. 

[Jpearson678]

So, I was either sniffed out and kicked out of the closed group for the Rembis family or they got rid of the page. 

Me to

[mirele]

On 1/14/2017 at 5:34 PM, acheronbeach said:

I wasn't asked any questions about my family situation when I applied to law school.  I'm Canadian but I was accepted to American law schools. 

I think it would come up in the bar investigation. When I went to law school in Texas back in the 1980s, you had to fill out a loooooong form for an investigation your first semester in law school. You had to list what you'd been convicted of and what the sentences were and give your fingerprints for investigation. I was such a straitlaced, moral thing that I had nothing to list and I'm sure my fingerprints turned up nothing. However, I also found out that even being a habitual drunk would not keep you from the bar (at least in the 1980s). One of the guys who was two years ahead of me (thus, in his last year) was approved for the bar, even though, as he said, he was so familiar the local jails that he joked about writing a Baedeker's Guide.