I attended my first
mediation session last week as the authorized representative of the adoptive
family. Note: Contrary to the language
in OAC rule 5101:2-49-05, which limits participation to county agencies and parents
only, parents may chose an attorney or other authorized representative to
participate with them
It is difficult, of
course, to generalize on the basis of one mediation session, but I came away
hopeful about the potential of mediation process to enable many adoptive
families negotiate an adequate amount of federal Title IV-E adoption assistance
for their special needs children. In the
next several posts, I will offer some observations and suggestions based on my
recent experience and conversation with Dan Shook, newly appointed Deputy
Director at ODJFS and policy chief over adoption assistance.
As readers of previous
posts may recall, I was quite skeptical of mediation as an effective tool to
solve disputes over the amount of adoption assistance. The skepticism was based on previous experience,
before mediation became a recognized option for parents in the amendments to
OAC rule 5101:2-49-05, which went into effect on July 1, 2014.
In my conversation with
Dan Shook prior to the mediation session, he assured me that the mediators had
undergone training and although the process was just underway, he was
encouraged by some of successful outcomes in which the parents and county
agency had come to an agreement over the children’s adoption assistance. He urges adoptive families to request mediation
when negotiations break down. He is
hopeful that the mediation process will serve to educate the mediators on the radical
adjustments and sacrifices that are characteristic of so many special needs
adoptions. Discussions between parents
and state officials should promote a better understanding of the crucial importance of
adoption assistance to those adults who feel a strong calling to provide
permanent, nurturing families for abused and neglected children.
Dan Shook and I have
agreed to share monthly phone calls. I
am convinced that he is fully committed to improving the support for families
through adoption assistance. He will be
my source on any internal trends and problems at the state and I will inform
him about any potential problems I see about the conduct of mediation from the adoptive families' perspective. I invite any readers to share their
experiences with me, so I can pass them along.
The following are some impressions gained from my recent involvement in
a mediation case. They, of course, are
subject to change as the mediation process evolves.
1. Mediators meet with both parties together, and
then privately with the parents and the agency.
Adoptive parents know better than anyone, the amount of adoption
assistance they need. Mediation is
inherently a negotiation process that aims at compromise. Suppose the county has proposed $450 a month
per child in adoption assistance payments.
The parents bottom line minimum is $650 per child and they have
presented information that supports such an amount. If the parents can afford to propose a higher
amount, say $800 or $850, and show a willingness to lower their offer, the
mediators will probably try to get the county to agree to an amount around
$650.
2. Part of the training Dan Shook referred to
involved acceptance of the federal Child
Welfare Policy Manual as the most authoritative source on the
interpretation of federal adoption assistance law. By implication, Ohio rule 5101:2-49-05, which
addresses the negotiation of adoption assistance payments, must be consistent
with Section 8.2D.4 of the
federal Child Welfare Policy Manual. We will discuss the significance of this
policy position in upcoming post. Suffice
it to say for now, that it provides adoptive parents the opportunity to present
their real concerns about the children's needs and their family circumstances as the reasons for seeking a certain
amount of adoption assistance.
3. It appears that the mediation process will
end up discussing monthly family budgets, including loss of income when a
parent cannot work outside the home because the children’s extensive care needs
or the expense of specialized child care.
At first glance, this looks like a means test, which is not permitted by
adoption assistance law. A future post
will discuss how adoptive families can turn monthly family budgets to their
advantage, by including all expenses and loss of resources. Submitting family budgets, which include estimated or actual expenses associated with the adoptive children's needs, along with costs that include the entire family will most likely be a routine part of the mediation process. It is consistent with a provision in the Child Welfare Policy Manual that states the objection of the negotiation of adoption assistance is to help enable the integration of special needs adopted children into a permanent household.
4. My impression is that personal statements
capturing the time, energy and costs involved in the day to day care of special
needs children will also be helpful to humanize discussions of budgets and
amounts of support. Personal
descriptions of daily challenges also sheds light on the children’s levels of
care. If there is a wide gap between the
amount of foster care payments chosen by the county agency and the amount of
adoption assistance proposed for the same children by the same agency, a
personal account of daily care responsibilities along with budget information
can raise important questions about the potential impact of significant loss in
monthly support facing an adoptive family. This topic will also be addressed in a future post.
5. Dan Shook recommended that parents submit information such as that described above, along with statements, arguments and appropriate documents to the mediator(s). It is best to submit relevant information at
least a few days before the scheduled mediation date, so the mediator(s) will
have the opportunity to familiarize themselves with the parents’ concerns and
policies which support them.
6. Three
persons from the Bureau of State Hearings participated in the mediation I
attended. My impression is that the use of multiple mediators
is a common practice and that it is helpful to the parents.
The next several posts
will address each of the above points in an effort to help parents prepare for
mediation.
