Tuesday, April 24, 2007

One strike....

Lily's cw decided to do visits twice a week since she is so young and it's important for them to bond as soon as possible.

Unfortunately, Lily's mom missed her very first visit yesterday. I'm told that if she misses three in a row, visits will be cancelled. Sort of like baseball or those three strikes laws.

I'm not sure how I feel about that. On the one hand, I don't want Lily to be transported unneccessarily and (as I think seeped through in my previous post) I'm not sure I think her mom should be seeing her at all until she cleans herself up.

On the other hand, starting twice weekly visits before she's entered rehab seems like a pretty big gauntlet and I have to wonder if mom's not being set up to fail. Which isn't really fair.

And to complicate matters even further, I don't really feel like the visits are necessarily in Lily's best interest at this point... I concede that moms and babies bond in utero and that children who are separated at birth experience separation issues. In this case, I'd imagine that Lily's drug withdrawal was probably worse than her mom withdrawal though, at least so far.

The issue I have been butting up against, and which I hate myself for having is that I don't think babies this young need to see their bio parents. There. I said the ugly thing I've been thinking. If Lily was 1 or 2 years old when she was removed, or in fact, if she had lived with or been cared for by her mom at all, then of course I'd think the parental bond needs to be maintained - that's why we took Bebe to visit her mom two or three times a week.

But at this point, are we maintaining a bond? Or at best are we re-establishing a bond, or creating one that's not there at this point? And at worst are we re-establishing or creating a bond prematurely - that is before Mom has even demonstrated that she's in any way committed to actually reclaiming the child that she had at one point decided to place with an adoptive family?

With Baby Bear, I really felt that the visits were neccessary and ultimately good. Because both his mom and dad really cared for him and were working to get him back as quickly as possible. They were very young and made a mistake which they were trying to correct.

This time, not so much. And I know it's about addiction and that she's disorganized and has little control over her behavior right now. But I also know she's had a baby and she needs to at least muster the wherewithall to decide what the heck she's going to do about that. I guess as much as I hate it I am angry. Angry for Lily and what already has happened to her and what might (or might not) happen to her in the future.

Sigh.

7 comments:

TeamWinks said...

That's quite the situation you have on your hands. You made some interesting points about the three stikes idea. Nothing seems easy or clear about this. Hoping that everything pans out as it should!

Dream Mommy said...

I agree, but babies this young get more visits to bond with the "mom" that hurt them in the first place. Visits stink, but they never think of the child's best interest with visits.

Robin said...

It will be hard either way for you since you are aware that her mother is choosing not to come for visits, but she is so lucky that she has you as a mother that will always be there for her unconditionally.

MommyNay said...

well Ill be the unpopular one who defends bio's and insists on supervising visits myself because I want to do everything in my power to establish a relationship with them and go out of my way to support and encourage reunification. Bella's worker throws imaginary darts at my head while we converse I am sure of it! That woman can't stand me. Ive gone as far as to have the mother of a 4-5month old call every night at 7pm to say goodnight to her son(whom she had never personally cared for as she was incarcerated at the time of his birth)was that for him? Well no ofcourse not! But it reminder her everyday what she needed to be doing and why and got her butt into a treatment program that he was able to join her in. Now one later she is doing great, and while she gave me a lot of credit for her sucess she was the one who did the work. I know her case isnt the norm. I would say at this point the visits would be more for the mom to maintain her bond(if she had one, in my experience many do...A's mom used heavily during pregnancy and Ill admit to feeling insanely jealous at our first visit because while he was only 2weeks old I knew immediatly that he knew who she was without a question)and get her on the track to make it or break it. The fact that she didnt show isnt a good sign, and its not a good sign that she is still openly using. Did you say if she is going into treatment? Im thinking positive thoughts for you.

JUST A MOM said...

oh you only have started!!!!!! hang in there

Yondalla said...

I think the visits are more important to the mom. If there is to be reunification, then the mom has to feel bonded to her baby. Seeing they baby may help her to be motivated to get clean.

It might not work. There is an excellent chance it won't work. However, if we want to give the mom all the tools and a fair chance to succeed, time to spend with her baby is probably essential.

Which does not negate any of the concerns you have.

Tamara said...

Cookie had to have visits with her drug-addicted Biomom who conveniently had every excuse in the book as to why she couldn't get herself to the place to get drug tested. Finally, after the courts intervened, she tested positive (to no one's surprise). I was always angry a current drug user got to spend time with a newborn. At the very least it was supervised. *sigh* I feel with you on this one, I really do.