A told us all yesterday that she's never actually worked with a family that has disrupted before. As that is the case, I want to know why she told us a year ago (when we first brought up the topic of disruption), that, while it seems like it will be a relief, most families process it as the death of a child. That could be true still, but it's certainly not from the experience of working with said families that she developed that opinion, as she'd implied.
Also, never having worked with a family that has disrupted before, it seems pretty harsh to say that disrupting would ruin Max, causing him to never again be able to trust another mom. That's not to say that the next family won't have their work cut out for them, but, still. It's pretty harsh for not having any personal experience.
I've had the option shared with me that it might be because she's feeling like she failed by not taking the issues I brought up seriously enough, that she's so mad at us. Could be.
Again, though, I'm not saying that this will be easy for Max. It'll be really awful. I keep imagining his little face when I tell him goodbye. I remember his face the day that I we talked about why his foster mom wasn't his mom anymore. It'll be like that. I think. It wasn't a happy talk. However, I still believe that not only will he have a better chance than if he stayed with us (which isn't to say that his chances of meaningful attachment are high), but that the rest of us would go down with him, in some respects, if he stayed.
No comments:
Post a Comment