Grandparents WIN in Child Dependency Enactment

On October 7, 2008, President Bush signed into law the new federal "Fostering Connections to Success and Improved Adoptions Act of 2008" (formerly H.R. 6893), as Public Law No. 110-351.

A Breaking News bulletin posted by Generations United announced "a historic day for grandfamilies" because "[t]he bill is a significant recognition of the contribution grandparents and other relatives make in raising the nation’s children."

GovTrack posted links to the many supportive floor speeches made in the House (09/17/08) and in the Senate (09/22/08).

The Congressional Research Service had summarized H.R. 6893 upon its introduction on September 15, 2008. Technically, the Act amends the Social Security Act with new provisions, as follows:

• Amends Part E (Federal Payments for Foster Care and Adoption Assistance) of title IV of the Social Security Act (SSA) to give state plans the option of providing for the state to enter into agreements to provide kinship guardianship assistance payments to grandparents and other relatives who have assumed legal guardianship of children for whom they have: (1) cared as foster parents; and (2) committed to care on a permanent basis.

• Amends SSA title IV part B (Child and Family Services) to authorize the Secretary of Health and Human Services to make matching grants to state, local, or tribal child welfare agencies and experienced private nonprofit organizations to help children in, or at risk of entering, foster care to reconnect with family members.

The Pew Charitable Trusts, through its national, non-partisan Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care, had researched appropriate changes in foster care funding, participation, and procedures, delivering a report in 2004, then advocating thereafter with its website, newsletters, and briefings. See: "Foster Care Reforms Advance in Congress, Courts and States" (04/06/06).

In "New Law is Designed to Improve Lives, Outcomes of Nation's Foster Children and Youth" (10/08/08), PCT, celebrated the derivative bill's enactment as "the most significant reform of the nation's foster care system in more than a decade."

These are the new Act's important provisions, according to that Press Release:

• Incentives to increase adoptions of children from foster care, especially older youth and those with special needs.
• Phased elimination of an outdated eligibility requirement for adoption assistance that will increase the number of special needs children who can be adopted with federal support.
• Federal resources to assist children who leave foster care for legal guardianships with family members.
• Direct federal foster care funding for tribal governments, so that more American Indian and Alaskan Native children can receive the supports and services they need while remaining in their own communities.
• Allowance of states to provide foster care supports and services to young people up to age 21.
• Improved oversight of educational progress and health care needs of children while in foster care.
• Mandated "reasonable efforts" to place siblings together when they enter the foster care system.

During consideration, Rep. Gerald Weller noted that H.R. 6893 favors involvement by grandparents in the lives of foster children:

The bill also promotes stronger family ties in caring for children removed from their own parents due to abuse and neglect, and expects States to do more to locate adult relatives like grandparents or aunts and uncles who can step in to care for such children. * * *

Rep. Fortney Stark followed up those remarks with his own, emphasizing the role of grandparents with children who become subject to foster care proceedings:

Madam Speaker, I point out that this subcommittee stands as proxy parents for half a million children in this country who spend time in foster care each year.

So I would like to thank Grandpa McDermott and Grandpa Weller on behalf of these 500,000 children whose lives are being improved, and Grandma Tauscher, for helping see that these children's lives are improved. * * *

[This bill] allows relatives, grandparents, to participate in supporting the foster children and allows them in many cases to live in loving homes rather than group homes and less permanent settings. * * *

Morris Brasovankin, bless his departed soul, would be so pleased.

He lost his court battle -- and custody of his grandson, Steven -- in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, but he may have inspired others to win a legislative war in Washington, D.C.

"All kids deserve families
so they can believe in themselves and grow up to be somebody."

-- Former foster youth,
in his testimony to the Pew Commission on Children in Foster Care

Elders and Marriage

On the occasion of my eldest son's wedding this coming Saturday, I am wondering about the view of older folks, as a group, about marriage.

The Pew Research Center posted an article on July 1, 2007, entitled "As Marriage and Parenthood Drift Apart, Public Is Concerned about Social Impact Generation Gap in Values, Behaviors" that announced and summarized the findings of a Report, entitled "As Marriage and Parenthood Drift Apart, Public is Concerned About Social Impact" (07/01/07; PDF, 91 pages).

The Report's Executive Summary lists & explains its key findings, including these points:

• Younger adults attach far less moral stigma than do their elders to out-of-wedlock births and cohabitation without marriage. They engage in these behaviors at rates unprecedented in U.S. history.
  

• Adults of all ages consider unwed parenting to be a big problem for society.
  

• Even though a decreasing percentage of the adult population is married, most unmarried adults say they want to marry.

• Married adults are more satisfied with their lives than are unmarried adults.

• Children may be perceived as less central to marriage, but they are as important as ever to their parents. As a source of adult happiness and fulfillment, children occupy a pedestal matched only by spouses and situated well above that of jobs, career, friends, hobbies and other relatives.

• With marriage exerting less influence over how adults organize their lives and bear their children, cohabitation is filling some of the vacuum.
  

• Americans by lopsided margins endorse the mom-and-dad home as the best setting in which to raise children. But by equally lopsided margins, they believe that if married parents are very unhappy with one another, divorce is the best option, both for them and for their children.
  

Were individual views different due to the age of survey respondents?

[T]he Pew survey finds that older adults – who came of age prior to the social and cultural upheavals of the 1960s – are more conservative than younger and middle-aged adults in their views on virtually all of these matters of marriage and parenting.

Thus, some of the overall change in public opinion is the result of what scholars call "generational replacement." That is, as older generations die off and are replaced by younger generations, public opinion shifts to reflect the attitudes of the age cohorts that now make up the bulk of the adult population.

Even among the younger generations (ages 18 to 64), however, our survey finds substantial differences in attitudes that fall along the fault lines of religion and ideology rather than age.* * *

For those senior citizens contemplating a second (or more) marriage, consider the advice given by Ashlea Ebeling in her extensive article "The Second Match" (11/12/07), posted by Forbes magazine.

She asks, "Should you remarry or just shack up?" Then she answers, "Consult your financial adviser and lawyer, as well as your conscience."

In 2006, 1.8 million Americans aged 50 and above lived in heterosexual "unmarried-partner households," a 50% increase from 2000, figures Bowling Green State University demographer Susan Brown.

Much of that growth is due to the baby boomers passing 50. But it also reflects the problems of blending finances later in life. Ninety percent of older heterosexual live-ins are widowed, separated or divorced. * * *

She suggests considering these aspects of the decision, which are explored in detail:

• Estate Planning

• Alimony and Palimony

• Social Security

• Survivors' Annuities

• College Financial Aid

• Nursing Home Costs

• Income Taxes

• Real Estate

In a shorter article posted by ElderCare Answers, entitled "Is It Better to Remarry or Just Live Together?", similar points are raised, including:

• Estate Planning


• Long-Term Care


• The Family Home
  


• Social Security
  


• Alimony
  


• Survivor's Annuities
  


• College Financial Aid

When couples are young, such factors are far from mind, and love alone might be the singular motivation. But for some older Americans contemplating remarriage, the question might be asked: "What's love got to do with it?"

In answering that question, I suggest that you first consult your conscience, and then "[c]onsult your financial adviser and lawyer."

Consider, also, the results of the survey (noted in the graph above) concerning "what makes a marriage work?"

Caring, Responsible (Wealthy) Children

Can wealthy parents raise caring, responsible (wealthy) children?

Wealthy parents worldwide are interested in the answer, and wonder about the process.

On July 30, 2008, Arabian Business posted an article entitled "Wealthy kids to get lessons in finance" by Soren Billing, who related how "Investment bank Merrill Lynch is to teach children of its wealthiest clients how to make the most of the money they inherit, with a special focus on how to effectively invest in charities."

Every year, children of the company’s richest clients are invited to a one week course where they are taught about topics such as different asset types, discretionary asset management and wealth structuring.

“A priority for our clients is equipping their sons and daughters with the skills and responsibility to manage the wealth they will inherit,” said Amir Sadr, Head of Middle East Wealth Management. * * *

This year’s London programme will include a special day about effective charitable giving. * * *

The programme will also focus on life coaching, developing leadership skills and personal security, giving the participants, aged between 18 and 25 years old, practical advice about how to keep themselves safe when they travel or go online.

Wealthy Arab families are not alone in wishing to inculcate skills, sense, and sensitivity in their children. Recent articles evidence that wealthy Americans pursue the same ends for their offspring.

On May 12, 2008, The Wall Street Journal's "Wealth Report" published an article entitled "10 Things the Wealthy Should Leave Their Kids — Besides Money":

When it comes to understanding the dysfunctions of wealthy families, Peter White is among the wisest.

He’s spent more than 20 years counseling wealthy parents and privileged children about how to better understand the adverse effects of wealth and to search for more meaningful lives.

He’s plied his trade at his own firm, as well as at Citi Private Bank and U.S. Trust. * * *

The article lists and briefly explains Peter A. White's "Ten Elements of Care" by parents towards their children. He recommends parents' attention to:

1. Necessaries
2. Affection
3. Affirmation and Support
4. Boundaries
5. Guidance
6. Respect
7. Trust
8. Forgiveness
9. Religion or Spirituality
10. Letting Go

The article notes (and the readers' posted comments ratify) a key point:

The list isn’t just for rich parents. But as Peter told me, it’s helpful for wealthy parents to learn that “the first thing to be concerned with is loving children in a way that enables them to take charge of their lives as adults, so they can use wealth to enhance, not diminish, their lives.”

Clearly, there are risks involved where children are raised in wealthy circumstances. An article entitled "Psychological Costs of Material Wealth" (summarized from "The Culture of Affluence Psychological Costs of Material Wealth" by S. Luthar published 2003 in Child Development, Vol. 74, Issue 6, by The Society for Research in Child Development, Inc.) suggested that affluent teenagers might be "troubled":

Children in wealthy families are usually thought of as being happy and well-adjusted, but recent research suggests that that they can be quite troubled.

In two studies affluent, suburban teenagers reported higher levels of substance use, as well as symptoms of anxiety and depression, than did other children of the same age. Exploration of causes suggested that two factors might be implicated: excessive pressures to achieve, and isolation from parents (both literal and emotional). * * *

Studies also indicate that parents in very wealthy communities can be more emotionally vulnerable than those in the middle classes.

When adults place inordinate emphasis on material success, for example, they tend to compromise attainment of other rewards critical for their psychological well-being, such as close interpersonal relationships. At the community level, too, material affluence can inhibit the formation of supportive networks, as services – such as child- or elder-care -- tend to be bought and not shared with neighbors. * * *

Not surprisingly, advisors, institutes, and organizations seek to address clients' concerns of educating children about money management and social responsibility.

For example, the Gallo Institute professes its two founders' belief that "The Most Important Service Financial Professionals Can Offer Clients Is Helping Them Educate Their Children About Money!"

According to a recent study [conducted by The New Retirement Mindscape, Ameriprise Financial, in conjunction with Harris Interactive, Inc., in January 2006], 61% of affluent parents with financially-dependent adult children rated “advice to help children become more financially savvy” as their top priority. And 52% of adults planning retirement share this concern as well.

Eileen and Jon Gallo have spent more than 20 years helping financial professionals and their clients navigate the complex issues of family wealth. Through their books, seminars and media appearances, the Gallos provide tools to help affluent parents raise financially intelligent children. * * *

The Gallos wrote a book, Silver Spoon Kids, as "a parent's guide to raising financially responsible children in an age of unprecedented wealth."

Drawing upon their experiences as members of the renowned NYU Family Wealth Institute, they tell you how to talk to kids about money, how to teach them to handle it responsibly, and how to instill in your kids a sense of giving to their communities.

Eileen Gallo (a psychotherapist) and Jon Gallo (an estate planning attorney), of Los Angeles, California, were interviewed as the authors of Silver Spoon Kids: How Successful Parents Raise Responsible Children by Aish.com about "money, kids and the sudden discovery of being Jewish" after their book was featured in a Time magazine article.

Similarly, The Inheritance Project (also known as Trio Press) seeks to smash myths that the "possession of wealth brings happiness" and that "[t]hose who inherit (money they did not earn) do not deserve their wealth." That organization offers ten "publications for heirs, wealthy parents, and professional advisors" that address "the many complex issues that surround inheritance."

More recent studies indicate that wealth is a positive factor in families, if properly handled.

On March 26, 2008, a summary entitled "How wealth affects children's cognitive achievement" noted that "a new study published in the March/April 2008 issue of the journal Child Development found that family wealth might partly explain differences in test scores in school-age children."

The study, conducted by researchers at New York University, also found that family wealth is positively associated with parenting behavior, home environment, and children's self-esteem.

In Pennsylvania, on February 12, 2007, PNC Bank issued a Press Release about its commissioned study, released as "Growing Up Wealthy", that found "affluent teens don't fit tabloid stereotype."

PNC Wealth Management's "Growing Up Wealthy" study depicts an affluent youth culture that is privileged yet more responsible, hard working and ambitious than the perception fueled by the antics of young celebrity socialites.

On the PNC Bank website, "Growing Up Wealthy" resources are offered: a Press Release, Survey Highlights, a PowerPoint presentation, and various "sound bytes" by Bruce Bickel, Managing Director of PNC's Private Foundation Management Services.

Another resource for bringing awareness to a child about personal and social responsibility in the setting of an anticipated inheritance is the Fox Studios movie, released in February, 2007 -- The Ultimate Gift. Its website offers discussion materials. For additional background and links, see PA EE&F Law Blog posting "The Ultimate Gift" Movie (03/12/07).

Finally, parents might wish to consider another resource: a game.

On March 12, 2008 the Wall Street Journal published an article entitled "Games Can Help Rich Kids Value Money" by Josee Rose, who described "a board game, a stock-market contest and donating $1,000 to charity" as "techniques financial advisers are using to help wealthy parents introduce concepts of financial and social responsibility to children of wealth."

Wealthy families frequently worry that, as money trickles down through the generations, its value is lost. The first and second generation sacrificed to accumulate their wealth, and they tend to pamper the next generation, says Glenn Kautt, president of the Monitor Group, a wealth management firm in McLean, Va. "That generation is the one that has the sense of entitlement."

Financial advisers find that sometimes the easiest way to raise the topic of the responsibilities of wealth is by playing a game.

GenSpring Family Offices LLC, which serves 600 families whose collective worth exceeds $15 billion, created a board game called "Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves," meant to open a discussion on family-wealth issues.

The name is based on the old proverb, "Shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations," and the game, which feels in some ways like the game Monopoly, asks the question, "How long will your money last?" * * *

The game addresses a "curse" that may be real: Marilyn Gardner described the "Midas Curse" in "The curse of vanishing wealth" originally published by The Christian Science Monitor, then posted by MSN Money:

"Almost everybody knows a family or has seen a case where the money hurt somebody in the family, or the kids or grandchildren blew it all," says [Rodney] Zeeb, an attorney and coauthor (with Perry L. Cochell) of "Beating the Midas Curse" [Heritage Institute Press, 2005,] a reference to the destructive relationships with money that splinter some families.

So widespread is the problem, that six out of 10 affluent families will lose the family fortune by the end of the second generation, Zeeb says. And nine out of 10 will have depleted the family wealth by the end of the third generation.

It's a modern-day drama summed up in an ancient Chinese adage: "Wealth never survives three generations."

Nineteenth-century Americans updated it to read, "From shirtsleeves to shirtsleeves in three generations." * * *

See also: "7 ways to raise kids who can hold onto money", by Terry Savage, posted on MSN Money, who advises: "Strengthen your child's grasp of financial matters by starting early, keeping lessons simple and setting an example."

That game, "Shirtsleeves to Shirtsleeves", was featured in an audio article entitled "The game of wealth management" broadcast June 25, 2008, on National Public Radio's "Marketplace." You can listen to the show to determine if you (or your children) might prefer it to Monopoly.

[Graphic Source: Educational Week, here]

Bills Proposed for Grandparents' Child Custody

On November 6, 2007, the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review published an article entitled "Grandparents may win rights in state", by Katen Roebuck, which noted "[g]randparents could get preferential treatment to rear grandchildren under a proposed state law."

The "grandparents rights bill" would require courts to consider giving grandparents legal custody when parents or guardians will not be granted the children.

Although it passed the House by a 181-11 vote last week, supporters and opponents disagree on how much preferential treatment grandparents would gain under the bill.

The PA House Bill under discussion is HB 1548, now in Printer's No. 2726. According to the legislative history of HB 1548, after passage by the House on October 29, 2007, it was introduced in the Senate on November 13, 2007, and then referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Pennsylvania, among the states, had been labeled "the worst by far" by advocates for grandparental rights regarding grandchildren. See: "Courts giving grandparents a big say on visitation, custody issues", by Barbara White Stack, published June 22, 2003, in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette.

Grandparents' rights were expanded in Pennsylvania with the enactment of the "Grandparents Visitation Act", 23 Pa.C.S. § 5311. It provides:

If a parent of an unmarried child is deceased, the parents or grandparents of the deceased parent may be granted reasonable partial custody or visitation rights, or both, to the unmarried child by the court upon a finding that partial custody or visitation rights, or both, would be in the best interest of the child and would not interfere with the parent-child relationship. The court shall consider the amount of personal contact between the parents or grandparents of the deceased parent and the child prior to the application.

For an overview of the Act, see: "Grandparent Rights", posted by the Erie County Bar Association.

In 2006, the Act was upheld as to constitutionality by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in Hiller v. Fausey, 904 A.2d 875 (Aug. 22, 2006; PDF, 24 pages), in the situation of "partial custody or visitation to grandparents upon the death of their child who is also the grandchild’s parent." A "concurring" opinion was filed by Chief Justice Cappy; and a "dissenting opinion" was filed by Justice Newman.

For a commentary on this decision, see: "Pennsylvania’s Grandparents’ Visitation Act is Constitutional, and Granting Maternal Grandmother Partial Physical Custody of Her Grandson After Her Daughter Dies Does Not Violate Father’s Constitutional Rights", posted by the Juvenile Law Center.

This expansion of grandparents' rights follows a national trend. See: "Recent legal rulings favor grandparents", by Joan Biskupic, published September 12, 2006, by USA Today.

But grandparents rights remain undefined in other situations, such as the setting of "juvenile dependency" proceedings. This was the setting of a much publicized case before Philadelphia's Family Court, where custody in caretaking grandparents of a five-year old child was denied. See: EE&F Law Blog posting, "Grandparents Lose in Child Dependency Case" (10/17/07).

That trial court's ruling is authorized by principles repeated in a PA Superior Court decision issued May 4, 2007, captioned In the Interest of B.S., Appeal of D.D. A three-judge panel of that Court held that a paternal grandmother of a child "did not have standing to participate in the child’s dependency proceedings."

The Superior Court cited the Juvenile Act, 42 Pa.C.S.A. §§ 6301-65, and cases decided under it, including In re L.J., 691 A.2d 520 (Pa. Super. 1999), and In re L.C. II, 900 A.2d 378 (Pa. Super. 2006), to support its holding. It reiterated:

This statutory section [§ 6336.1 "Notice and Hearing."] is silent regarding either the right to be heard or statutory standing for grandparents or relatives who at some time in the past served as primary caregiver for the child.

Particularly after that Superior Court decision and the Philadelphia trial court ruling, powerful seniors' organizations, such as AARP, allied with other child welfare advocates, now seek expansion and clarification of grandparents' rights in child custody & juvenile dependency matters.

The recent article mentions the tension that is perceived to exist, however.

"I think it does clearly show a very strong lobbying effort to give grandparents a serious advantage," said Harry Gruener, assistant clinical professor at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law.

"They've always had that favored status, and they have it in every state."

Proponents say grandparents' interests generally are disregarded in custody cases. Critics, including Gov. Ed Rendell, say the bill puts grandparents' interests above children's.

The bill would give grandparents legal standing in custody cases, which no relative automatically has in Pennsylvania, according to Gruener and Randall Wenger, chief counsel of the nonprofit Pennsylvania Family Institute, a Harrisburg public policy group that suggested the law. * * *

Although state laws require the Department of Public Welfare to consider grandparents and other relatives while making custody recommendations, no relatives have legal rights to argue their cases in court, Gruener and Wenger said.

"This law is going to force (judges) to consider the grandparents," said Rep. William Kortz, D-Dravosburg, who co-sponsored the bill. The law would be good for children's psychological health by keeping intact at least some of their families, Kortz said. * * *

The article also reports that the Senate Judiciary Committee is expected to consider soon a somewhat similar bill, Senate Bill 515, which was introduced on March 19, 2007.

If the bill is approved by the Legislature in its existing form, there appears still to be some question as to its effect, reports the article, and this may prevent its signature by the Governor:

The proposed law is unclear about whether it gives grandparents first crack at custody over other relatives, Mackereth said.

Rendell's office and the Welfare Department said it does; Kortz and the Pennsylvania Family Institute said it does not.

Another article, entitled "Grandparent Rights, Capital Punishment Bills Proceed in Pa. Legislature", posted by the Associated Press on October 30, 2007, quoted Rep. Randy Vulakovich (R-Allegheny), a co-sponsor:

"We have recognized as a society that it's not always in the best interests of the children to be raised by their birth parents, such as in abuse and neglect."

"Sometimes the best candidates for caring for dependent children are overlooked — their own grandparents."

Grandparents Lose in Child Dependency Case

On September 11, 2007, a Philadelphia County Family Court Judge denied the request of two aged grandparents seeking custody of their 5-year old grandson, who was raised from birth by them, but who was taken from them for placement in foster care.

The case had received significant attention and garnered much sympathy throughout last summer, as reported in news articles:

• "Too Old To Be Parents?", by Wendy Ruderman, published by The Philadelphia Daily News (06/15/07).

• "Fight for Steven", by Diane Prokop, posted by the Northeast Times (07/12/07).

• "80-Plus = Too Old to Raise Grandchild?" by Martha Neil, posted on the American Bar Association Journal's "Law News Now" (07/13/07).

• "Phila. Couple Too Old to Care for Grandson? Court Will Decide", by Paul Kurtz, of KYW News Radio (07/17/07).

• "Grandparents want custody of 5-year-old", by Jan Hefler, published by The Philadelphia Inquirer (07/18/07).

• "The fight for Steven continues", by Diane Prokop, posted by the Northeast Times (07/26/07).
  

• "Patience is key in grandparents custody case", by Diane Prokop, posted by the Northeast Times (09/06/07).

• "Octogenarian grandparents fight for custody -- Say Human Services staff 'stole' boy from their home, returned him to foster care", by Kathy Matheson, of the Associated Press, posted by Delaware Online (09/11/07).

But, on September 11, 2007, according to the article "Judge won't reunite boy, grandparents", by Joseph A. Slobodzian, published on September 12, 2007, by The Philadelphia Inquirer, "Family Court Judge Ann Butchart ruled that young Steven should remain in foster care until his father was again able to care for him at home."

Steven Brasovankin, the 5-year-old taken under court order from his elderly Northeast Philadelphia grandparents in June, will not be returning to his grandparents' home, a Family Court judge ruled yesterday.

The decision was a disappointment for the boy's grandparents, Morris Brasovankin, 89, and his wife, Mildred, 86, who had regularly cared for their grandson since his birth and hoped to have that situation formalized until their son, Steven, 54, could again care for the boy. * * *

Still, the Brasovankins were permitted to continue their supervised, one-hour weekly visits with their grandson, and a spokesman for Family Court Administrative Judge Kevin Dougherty said the chance for a family reunification had improved. * * *

"The court's goal remains reunification with the family," Jubelirer added. "But for the time being, the child will remain in foster care."

Reporter Diane Prokop noted, in her article regarding the decision, that "Steven’s case focuses on dependency and not custody, citing a statement issued by Philadelphia Family Court Administrative Judge Kevin M. Dougherty:

"This case is a dependency matter, involving allegations of abuse or neglect of a minor child.

In Dependency Court, the judge makes decisions regarding the physical and psychological well-being of minors whose parents cannot presently care for them," Dougherty said in the statement.

"Dependency cases focus on the child and his or her parent(s). Dependency cases require the court to balance the rights of the minor child with the rights and actions of the biological parent(s) and legal guardians," he said.

"Under Pennsylvania law, grandparents are typically afforded more rights in custody cases than in dependency cases."

An article posted by Lancaster Online, entitled "Judge To Decide Where Boy, 5, Is To Live", stimulated many comments by readers on Talkback Lancaster.

Perhaps such media attention and such emotional comments flowed because the situation of a grandparent offering custodial care for grandchildren is so common in Pennsylvania, as elsewhere.

GrandsPlace notes in a Pennsylvania State Fact Sheet that "[a]cross the country, more than six million children -- approximately 1 in 12 children -- are living in households headed by grandparents or other relatives." It further notes:

In Pennsylvania, public and private agencies and grassroots coalitions of grandparents and other relative caregivers have begun working together to expand the services available to kinship caregivers who are caring for children outside of the foster care system.

Several of the major kinship care programs and supports are listed below. Additional support groups can be found through the AARP Grandparent Information Center Database. Call 1-800-424-3410, e-mail information requests to gic@aarp.org, or search AARP’s online kinship care support group database.

The Pennsylvania Department of Aging provides guidance online for elders who have accepted such loving service, by way of its advisory entitled "Pennsylvania Grandparents Raising Grandchildren: A Six-Part Fact Sheet Series".

Or perhaps the outpouring of interest and feelings reflect the heart-wrenching, long-term effects of a separation that upsets a previously-established caregiving arrangement.

In the case of little Steven Brasovankin, no one can talk about it publicly now, according to the Inquirer article:

The elderly couple did not respond to questions after the two-hour closed-door hearing, and their attorney, Marc D. Collazzo, said the judge imposed a gag order on all the parties. * * *

[The case] status would be reviewed at a future, unscheduled hearing. * * *

[Photo Credit: Clem Murray, Philadelphia Inquirer Staff, from July 18, 2007 Article]

Update: 11/15/07:

Legislation pending in the Pennsylvania House of Representatives might change the outcome of the case described above. See: "Bills Proposed for Grandparents' Child Custody" (11/15/07).

Update: 03/29/08:

Philadelphia Daily News columnist Ronnie Polaneczky wrote an article published on January 14, 2008, entitled "His fight for grandson made him a hero". He noted that "Morris Brasovankin died last weekend."

It's safe to say that he would have lived out his last days in peaceful obscurity had he not reluctantly thrown himself into the national spotlight last summer.

Out of love. And desperation.

In the process, he -- and his wife, Mildred -- became heroes to so many families, it's hard to think of his battle as anything but a victory, even if he didn't live to get what he wanted so fiercely: The privilege of raising his grandson, even in his ninth decade of life.

Morris was 89 when he passed away on Friday from medical complications following an aneurysm. His family sat shiva for him yesterday at the Brasovankins' cozy stone twin in Oxford Circle. I was invited to attend by his niece, though some of his family felt my visit was an intrusion.

But Mildred, who is 86, liked the idea of someone writing something nice about her husband. * * *

The column ended with these comments:

The judge held that the Brasovankins' home was no place for Steven to live.

They were allowed one hour of supervised time with Steven each week. Just one hour, after having had Steven all to themselves for months.

Since Family Court Judge Ann Butchart has issued a gag order on this case, it's impossible to know why she reduced Mildred and Morris to being spectators in Steven's life.

But the cruelty of the ruling crushed Morris, said Mildred.

"He wanted very much to live," she said. "He wanted to keep fighting. He was heroic. He was not going to accept someone else telling him he was too old to do what was right."

Some people in this much-talked about case agreed with the court, and thought that Steven should not be placed with such elderly grandparents.

"They haven't much time," the thinking goes. "Why subject Steven to another, inevitable loss and its upheaval?"

By the same token, given the Brasovankins' numbered days, why not allow Steven as much time as possible with the people who were so constant in his life?

"What I'll always remember about Morris is how hard he fought," said the Bransovankins' attorney Marc Collazzo, who attended Morris' graveside funeral yesterday at Montefiore Cemetery. "This case got so much bigger than him and Mildred. They never meant it to. They just wanted Steven back."

Update: 10/16/08:

On October 7, 2008, President Bush signed into law the new federal "Fostering Connections to Success and Improved Adoptions Act of 2008" (formerly H.R. 6893), as Public Law No. 110-351.

For background and details, see: PA EE&F Law Blog posting "Grandparents WIN in Child Dependency Enactment" (10/16/08).