2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

In 2003 we fostered and then adopted a special needs foster child.  He is moderately retared and has medical problems. Because of these issues my wife cannot work.

We currently recieve a small stipend for his care.  We recently heard that the state might increase payments for these children.  When we sent a letter requesting more information on this we recieved a reply that if we wanted to re-negotiate the re-negotiation would start at zero.  (seemed like a veiled threat that we could lose some or all of our stipend). On my one income at a non-profit we would have a terribly hard time if his stipend was reduced.

We will always love and take care of our child (as well as our two ther children). We would do it for free.  It just seems odd for the state to send a letter saying they might be able to provide more assitance and then make it impossible for us to re-negotiate.

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context