This document provides a review of a television program about long-term foster care. In the first episode, a teenage girl named Amy seems settled in with her foster parents. However, after Amy is secretly meeting a boy, her foster parents question whether to continue the placement. Amy's foster parents send her to another placement while they reconsider. The reviewer criticizes the foster parents for lacking understanding of Amy's needs and giving up on her after typical teenage behavior. They feel the program portrays fostering negatively and leaves the impression that foster parents may reject children in their care.

1. Protecting our foster kids – Review 7/6/2015
I had high hopes for this series.Fostering,long term has the potential to change kids lives.Itstarts with
happy opening shots of Amy – quickly ruined by a sad voice over the happy scenes – we aremore than
that – that ‘sympathetic” voiceirritates likefingernailsscrapingdown a blackboard.
Fostering was the golden egg when I was in care. We all wanted a new mum and dad. We would discuss
our wish lists,minewas a littlesister, brothers I already had in abundance,and a mum and dad who were
young. My wishes were described as rosetinted and constructed from a Kellogg’s cornflakes advert.Why
wouldn't they be – I was 10.
Foster mum enters the programme - “At first I wanted young children – teenagers are under estimated –
something very special about Amy when we first met her – a bit like falling in love.” This has to be the
quote of the year. Beautiful description.
Back to Amy who has the most beautiful glowingeyes, and a life storybook. Incongruent I know. Life for a
looked after child often is.
What is a foster carer,Amy is asked – “someone who treats you liketheir own family,liketheir own
children”says Amy. This is where the fantasy ends and the reality of fosteringfor many begins.
Foster mum explains how “Amy is very settled in our placement”– Our placement! The caresystem
languagedrives me mad. Why do some speak without thinking? Lazy? Bought me crashingback to reality
– is Amy livingin her home, or in her placement? This is notlookinggood.
Amy’s sister has moved in too, a controversial subjectin care.Should brothers and sisters,or siblingsas is
the languageof the care system, stay together? Should they, shouldn'tthey? The cynic in me shouts that
this is goingto end badly.
Amy and foster mum are havinga discussion about sister Nataliein the kitchen, Natalieis in the living
room and can obviously hear the whole conversation –this programme feels horrible. Voyeuristic.Weird.
My heart hurts.The memories flood back of many of my failed “placements”.
The programme music takes a sudden sad turn – Amy has met a boy in secret when she should have been
with friends – “Our children wouldn't do something like that – she has a stable home, everything she needs,
there is no rational reason – should we continue with the placement? The lack of understanding,
commitment and compassion fromthe foster parents is shocking. “Is Amy the girl we think she is?”
Deeply depressing.
This is supposed to be long term fostering – what we would have called our forever family.Are you joking
– where is the “we will stick by this child forever”? Before I can consider my thoughts, Amy has been “sent”
to another “placement” for the foster parents to consider their options.
Amy is well aware I’m sure, that this “placement” is goingto end. We all do.We are told they will speak to
their social worker.We aretold that our “placement”, not our home, is atrisk.We know what’s coming,
so what do we do? We take control and we end it for them. So – there you go – a placement breakdown
that will stand before us as a placement that's broken down due to “us”.
At last,someone speaks up for Amy. Her social worker comes on screen, and sounds angry for Amy. Go on
girl,I shout atthe screen, give em some grief for letting this child down.
Foster mum is worried that she won’t be ableto keep Amy safe. That's ok then. Reject her after some
pretty typical teenage behavior – that will teach her how to control her behavior.

2. These foster parents arenot getting it – the social worker was – until she said –lets do a behavior
contract– my oh my – that's family lifeinit. In walks Amy – looking ashamed.Job done. There you go
Amy – bit more shame and guiltfor ya inner world.
The firstseries – protecting our children –was both groundbreaking and exhilarating.Children were being
rescued, parents were being helped, and social workers were sharingtheir specialistskillsatprotecting
our most vulnerablechildren.
This series is the opposite. It's a negative portrayal of what can be the opportunity for kids to have a
chance, sometimes, often for the firsttime, of livingwithin a family,a lovingkind family, full of fun and
nurturing. Nurturing aint what’s happening here. It’s left me feeling angry. Angry at these “foster parents”
who appear to be no more than caretakers.They appear to have no understandingof Amy’s needs and
have given up on her. Lets not sugar coatit for fear of being seen as negative. Should they be allowed to
continue to take kids in only to reject them? If this were Battersee Dogs Home, the person would have to
convincepretty hard for them to be ableto take another animal –are kids in careworth less than an
abandoned animal? I watch the full programme only for the benefit of this review.
“I got dumped, cause I wasn't wanted. I had to wait a whole weekend to find out what was happening, as
social workers don't work weekends.”
The meeting happens – agree to anythingthey say Amy otherwise you are out girl.
“Anything you want to add Amy”? She shakes her head. I would have said –fuck you.
Amy is now ignoringthe foster parents – really.
The foster parents have called time – I can barely watch this.Will notwatch the rest of the series.
Should Amy and her sister have been allowed to feature in this programme? I feel slightly dirty.Ashamed.
Guilty.I feel that I’ve added to their exposure by watching and writingthis review.
Fostering is a serious commitment, not one that can be played around with. Had these foster parents
been courageous enough to admitthat they had made the wrong choicein becoming long term foster
parents, and not sought to ‘blame” the breakdown of the relationship on the 2 girls,my respoce4 would
have been there. Instead, the guiltof foster kids inner worlds grows ever taller,tower block tall,with
every shiftof blame. The behavior of the girls was notthe catalystfor them havingto move – the foster
parents decision to give up was.
Sadly this programme does not liveup to its predecessor, protecting our children.I acceptthat when the
programme makers began followingAmy and her sister,all looked well,however, for fostering,with all its
qualities,this programmehas done it no favours.One can only hope that the non social work world would
have spent the hour screamingat the TV ‘I could do that” and spent Monday researchinghow to apply to
foster.