Achievement of foster care system in Korea b= y Korean Foster Care Association (KFCA) and social barriers/improvement measures to promote the system

&= nbsp; =

Youn= gsook Park, Korean Foster Care President/Social Welfa= re PhD student at Sungkyunkwan University

I. H= ISTORY OF FOSTER CARE IN KO= REA

The first Korean foster care system, which was introduce= d in AD 28 during the King Yuri reign of the Shilla Dynasty, provided food and family care for orphans as a part of education and protection services for orphans. During the Koryo Dyn= asty the government looked after children who would be slaves for noble families. During the King Suk= jong reign of the Chosun Dynasty, = in 1783 a temporary foster care was introduced. However, during the King Jungjo reign of the Chosun Dynasty, a national system of foster care entitled R= 20;Save the Poor Law” was introduced to find mothers who could breastfeed orphans, and mothers who could provide food for orphans by the national off= er of food services. This was the first systematic foster care service provide= d by the government.

During the Korean War,&= nbsp; in 1950, private sector social welfare organizations were active in saving war orphans amidst the social chaos caused by the North-South ideological war. In 1959 the Children’s Charter was announced and in 1961 the Child Welfare Law was activated, and = the public concept of child protection and public awareness of children’s rights started, which led religious organizations and government to build orphanages right after the Korean War until the 1960s to look after the many war orphans and deserted and separated children from their birth parents du= e to poverty. Before the orphanages, beggars are condemned to be poor and the poverty was considered as their own fault and destiny for the poor. Those a= re not worthwhile to be helped or no time to help those underprivileged.<= /o:p>

After the military coup-d’etat in 1961, the govern= ment promoted a series of long term child protection measures and foster care sy= stem to the society. Since 1965, f= our overseas adoption organizations were established and foster care was approv= ed for those who were ready to be adopted abroad by paid-foster parents until their dispatch abroad for adoption. Those parents were paid for raising children in pre-adoptive homes, of which the fees are sponsored by the adop= ting parents abroad. This is not the western type of foster care where children = from foster homes are returned to their own birth parents in the long run. Those children in pre-adoptive homes are children of single mothers who permanent= ly signed away their rights for overseas adoption.

By the 1990s severe criticism of systems of institutional care and children as the heads of families, which were the only two systems existed where government funded. This was challenged by young child welfare academics returning from their studies from Western nations, and the UN Convention of the Rights of the child (UNCRC) ratification of Korean govern= ment in 1991. The UNCRC ratification by Korean government came a bit prematually earlay but helped to broaden the public views on children’s rights and western concept of child protection. This was the time when the government realized the need to shift the system to focus on foster care and group hom= es, instead of the institutional care and overseas adoption to avoid facing the child rights issues. The system of Children Heads of Family was also severe= ly criticized by the UN Child Rights Committee for being inhumane and for being abusive in demanding children becoming the heads of families to earn the li= ving and looking after the entire family. The terminology of Children Head of Fa= mily (now changed to Younth Families) became a legal term for children living on their own on 13 March 1984 when many children lived in poverty without their parents. Government financial support began on 11 June 1985 for these child= ren, and due to the UNCRC’s demands and criticism of the system, the government altered the termino= logy to “Youth Family” in September 2000. This is the budget categor= y of the largest financially supported by the government followed by the institutional care in child protection budget of social welfare.=

Since the Korean Foster Care Association(KFCA) was established officially in 1998 right after the Asian Economic Crisis when t= here were a huge number of job lay-offs of parents and abandonment of children in the society, the government started to pay attention to foster care. The Ko= rean Foster Care Association, an NGO organization which has been providing homes= for children in private homes since 1995, was recognized by the government and demands were accepted by the government for financial assistance to operate foster care support agencies in 16 cities. The Child Welfare Law Article 10= (3^rd line of Clause 1) stipulates foster care as children under age 18 who live = with relatives, not with direct family members.= Although the Child Welfare Law Article 1 (2^nd line of Cla= use 1) stipulates kinship care as children under age 18 who live with direct family, not with their own parents.

The government finally established sixteen Centers of Fo= ster Care Support Agencies in Korea in 2003, providing 100 million won (US$83,00= 0) per center with 3 staff members in each center. The Korean Foster Care Association runs 5 centers in Korea and became the Center of Cordinating Ag= ency of other foster care centers by establishing the Central Foster Care Support Agency in Seoul in July 2004, which received the government funds of 400 million won (US$333,000), adding the f= unds of 200 million (US$83,000) won for The Korean Foster Care Association to provide education projects to foster care providers in 2004.

<= span style=3D'mso-list:Ignore'>II.&= nbsp; &nbs= p; USA and KOREA FOSTER CARE STATISTICS (figures in parenthesis is Korean)

1. US STATISTICS FROM US DEPT OF HEALTH & HUMAN SERV= ICES COMPARED WITH KOREAN GOVERNMENT FIGURES IN PARENTHESIS

How many children are served by the foster care system? = Who are they? What are their experiences in foster care? In the US, foster care is defined in the Child Welfare Law as "24-hour substitute care for children outside their own homes”. The reporting system incl= udes all children who have or had been in foster care at least 24 hours. The fos= ter care settings include, but are not limited to, family foster homes, relative foster homes (whether payments are not being made), group homes, emergency shelters, residential facilities, childcare institutions, and pre-adoptive homes." The data presented for FY 2001 are from The AFCARS Report: Preliminary FY 2001 Estimates as of March 2003 (U.S. Department of Health a= nd Human Services, 2003a) (www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ cb/ publications/afcars/report8.htm). For more information on AFCARS, visit the Children's Bureau Web site at www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/cb/dis /afca= rs/about.htm.)

Placement Statistics: As of September 30, 2001, there were an estima= ted 542,000 children in foster care (Until May 2004 there were approx 700 child= ren in foster care in Korea arranged by Korean Foster Care Association, and 150 children remain in foster care (non-relative) as of May 2004.) Entries: Dur= ing FY 2001, 290,000 children entered foster care (During 2003, 151 children entered foster care in Korea). Exits: During FY 2001, 263,000 children exit= ed foster care (During 2003, 40 children exited foster care).

Placement Types: Of the estimated 542,000 children in foster care as= of September 30, 2001: 48 percent were in foster family homes (non-relative) (= 8% in non-relative foster homes in 2003 in Korea), 24 percent were in relative fo= ster homes (According to the Ministry of Health & Welfare, 92.9% were cared for by relative fo= ster homes in 2003), 18 percent were in group homes (3%, some100 children were in group homes in 2003), 4 percent were in pre-adoptive homes, and 6 percent w= ere in other placement types.

Permanency Goals: Of the estimated 542,000 children in foster care a= s of September 30, 2001, 44 percent had a goal of being reunited with their fami= ly (91% had a goal of being reunited with their families up to 2003 in Korea), 22 percent had a goal of adoption (2.42% had a goal of adoption), 8 percent ha= d a goal of living with a relative or guardian, 8 percent had a goal of long-te= rm foster care (1.9%, longer than 3 years, had a goal of long-term foster care= ), 6 percent had a goal of emancipation, and 11 percent had not yet established a permanency goal.

Outcomes: Exits: Of the estimated 263,000 children who exited foster care during FY 2001: 57 percent were reunited with their families (Of 550 children who exited foster care until May 2004, 90% were reunited in Korea)= 20% were adopted (2.5% adopted), 13 percent went to live with a relative or guardian (2 children, 0.003%), 7 percent were emancipated, and 5 percent had other outcomes (2 children to group homes, 0.003%).

Length of Stay: Of the estimated 263,000 children who exited foster = care during FY 2001: 19 percent had been in care less than 1 month, 17 percent h= ad been in care for 1 to 5 months (Of the estimated 550 children who exited, 1= 0% stayed for 1-5 months in Korea), 14 percent had been in care for 6 to 11 mo= nths (42% stayed less than a year), 19 percent had been in care for 1 to 2 years (35%), 11 percent had been in care for 2 to 3 years (10%), 11 percent had b= een in care for 3 to 4 years (2%), and 9 percent had been in care for 5 or more years (7 children, 1%).

Age: The median age of the children in foster care on September 30, = 2001 was 10.6 years (5.7 years in Korea). The median age of children entering fo= ster care during FY 2001 was 8.7 years (4.5 years in Korea). The median age of children exiting foster care during FY 2001 was 10.2 years.

Gender: Of the estimated 542,000 children in foster care as of Septe= mber 30, 2001, 52 percent were male (49%) and 48 percent were female (51%).

Re-entries: A median 10.3 percent of children who entered foster car= e in FY 2000 re-entered the system within 12 months of discharge. (0.1%)

Cost: The Urban Institute estimates in FY 2000, total spending (fede= ral, Ssate, and local) for out-of-home care was at least $9.1 billion (11 trilli= on won ) (The Korean government budget for 2002 is 2.8 billion won (US$ 2.4 million)).

2. KOREAN STATISTICS FROM MINISTRY OF HEALTH & WELFA= RE ON BUDGET

THE KOREAN MINISTRY OF HEALTH & WELFARE BUDGET OF 20= 02FOR CHILD WELFARE

(million won)

SECTOR	200= 1	200= 2	INCREMENT	% <= o:p>	DETAILS
TOTAL	73,= 675	77,= 087	3,4= 12	4.6=
INSTITUTIONS MANAGEMENT BUDGET SUPPORT FACILITIES<= /span>	51,= 917 47,= 498 4,4= 19	57,= 742 53,= 203 4,5= 39	5,8= 25 5,7= 05 120=	11.= 2 12.= 0 2.7=	ㅇ 276 institutions ㅇ 3,734,000→4,1= 61,000w/child ㅇ 19,201 → 19,260 children ㅇ 3,288 → 3,689 social workers ㅇ facility repair: 4 facilies ㅇ 16 institutions built<= span style=3D'font-family:\00BD\00C5\00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> ㅇ 63 institutions renovated ㅇ 8 sewage facilities ㅇ 23 equipment/repair

2. NON-INSTITUTIONS - YOUTH FAMILIES <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> - FOSTER CARE <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> - GROUP HOME -DI= SABLED ADOPTION FAMILIES -FAMILY SUPPORT <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> -ADOPTION AGENCY - &nbs= p; ADOPTION INFO CENTER <= o:p> - &nbs= p; FAMILY RELATIONS = - &nbs= p; INDEPENDENCY FEES= <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'> <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'>CHILDSUPPORTAGENC <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;mso-hansi-font-family:= \00BD\00C5\00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'>- LOCAL CENTERS <= span style=3D'font-size:8.0pt;mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5= \00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'>- FOOD SUPPORT -INDEPENDENCY SUPPORT - &nbs= p; CHILDREN’S DAY - &nbs= p; MISSING CHILDREN CENTER	21,= 739 8,0= 86 1,5= 94 187= 91<= o:p> 123= 16<= o:p> 1,3= 20 550= 975= 154= 821= 8,6= 02 119= 18<= o:p> 58<= o:p>	19,= 271 6,8= 79 2,8= 35 196= 204= 129= 16<= o:p> 1,3= 62 600= 808= 141= 667= 5,9= 39 124= 18<= o:p> 161=	△2,4= 68 △1,2= 07 1,2= 41 9 113= 6 - 42<= o:p> 50<= o:p> △167= △13<= o:p> △154= △2,6= 63 5 - 103=	△14.= 6 △12.= 3 77.= 8 0.6= 124= .2 5.0= - 3.2= 9.1= △17.= 1 △8.4= △18.= 8 △31.= 0 4.2= - 177= .6	ㅇ 11,390 children - 6,5000 won per month per child ㅇ 4,600 children/ 65,000 w/mont= h ㅇ 32 group homes ㅇ 50 disabled adoptee - Medical fees/1.2 mil won/ye= ar - 500,000 w/month ㅇ 20 adoption agencies ㅇ 1 adoption information center/ Seoul ㅇ 16 agencies for 1,200 childre= n 1 mil won per child/year ㅇ 1 Child Support Cen= ter ㅇ 17 local centers ㅇ 15,280 children/ 2,000w/meal ㅇ Korean Orphanages U= nion ㅇ Korean Orphanages U= nion ㅇ Korea Welfare Foundation
<= span style=3D'font-size:11.0pt;font-family:\00BD\00C5\00B8\00ED\00C1\00B6'>ADM= INSTRATION COST	19	74<= o:p>	55<= o:p>	289= .5

Popu= lation: 47 944 500 people (as of 16 July 2= 003)

Birth Rate and issues: 1) 1970; 32.1 births per 1000 population; 2) 1980; = 23.4 births per 1000 population; 3) 1990; 15.5 births per 1000 population; 4) 19= 96; 15.1 births per 1000 population 5) 2002; 11.3 births per 1000 population (compared with the USA where, in 2000, the crude birth rate was 14.7/1000 population)

NUMBER AND BUDGET OF KOREAN INSTITUT= IONAL AND NON-INSTITUTIONAL CARE

Year 2002		Number of children	Number of organizations	Budget
Institutions (Orphanages)	Orphanages	49% - 19,260	276	44%- 57.8 billion won (US$49.2 million)<= /span>
Non-institutional Care	Children heads of families/Youth families	28.7% - 11,390	10,000 households	53%- 68.8 billion won (US$57.9 million)<= /span>
Foster care	12% - 4,600 children (500 in non-relative foster homes)	Approx. 4000 foster homes	2.1%- 2.8 billion won (US$2.4 million)
Adoption:	10= .2% - 4,059 (2,365 overseas, 1,694 local adoption= s)	20 adoption agencies	0.1%- 123 million won (US$105,000)=
Group homes	0.7% - Some 300	32 group homes	0.15%- 196 million won (US$167,000)
Total		Approx. 40,000		Approx. 130 billion won (US$ 107 million) * US foster = care budget: US$ 9.1 billion

1) Child Raising

2) Institutions/Orphanages: budget 57.8 billi= on won (US$49.2 million) for 276 institutions in 2002: 1) 1980; 253 institutio= ns; 20,908 inmates; 2) 1990; 223 institutions; 20 147 inmates; 3) 1995; 215 institutions; 15,105 inmates; 4) 1999; 211 institutions; 14,408 inmates; 5)= 2001; 238 institutions; 17,437 inmates 6) 2002; 276 institutions; 19,260 inmates;

Institutions for Infants: 1) 1980; 34 institutions; 2,477 infants; 2) 1990; 38 institutions 2 388 infants; 3) 1995; 36 institutions 2= ,118 infants; 4) 1999; 26 institutions 2,017 infants

2) Numbers of children in non-institutionalized substitute care.

The = Korean Ministry of Health and Welfare figures for 2002 show that 4,986 children fr= om 3,608 families were cared for by other families. Of these children: 4,630 childre= n or 92.9% were cared for by relatives; 356 children or 7.1% were cared for by people or households that were not related. The Ministry notes that the num= ber of children requiring substitute care is increasing substantially; 4,172 children in 2000, 4,425 children in 2001 to the current (2002) figure of 4,= 986 children. It is acknowledged by welfare professionals that there are approximately 2000 children who live, either by themselves or with other children, without any adults.

Chil= dren Heads of Families/Youth Families: budget 68.8 billion won (US$= 57.9 million) for 11,390 children in 2002

Fost= er care: budget 2.8 billion won (US$2.4 million); financial sup= port for foster care agencies and 6,5000 won per child in 2002 for 4600 children= who are in foster care in total (only some 400 are in foster care cared by non-relatives in 2002, mainly by the Korean Foster Care Association)

Adoption: budget 129 million won (US$110,000) for 20 adoption agencies (4 inter-country)/ 4,059 adoptees in = 2002 : 150,000 overseas adoptions since 1954 to approximately 12 western countri= es.

1) Overseas adoptions - 2436 children in 2001 and 23= 65 children in 2002 <= /span>

2) Local adoptions within Korea - 1770 children in 2= 001 and 1,694 children in 2002

Group homes: budget 196 million won(US$167,000) for 32 families (5-7 children each group homes) in 2002

III. SOCIAL BARRIERS/IMPROVEME= NT MEASURES FOR FOSTER CARE

1. KOREAN FAMILY CULTURE

Korea is a homogeneous nation with one languge and civilization. Ko= rea is a blood-oriented society with family roots and records that have been written down for several hundred years. It is also a male-dominated society where the names follow the father, never the mother, except for single mothers supporti= ng their children. When people divorce, the second fa= milies are neither recognized nor is there joint custody since both parents are eager to abandon = their children for their new marriages. When the mother takes her child into a second marriage, the child fa= ces discrimination by the stepfather’s family, while carrying his natural father’s name without children’s choice. Most Koreans marry and have childr= en.

Korea is still known as an orphan country where orphans are sold to overseas adoptions. It is the only country among the OECD nations to export children abroad while its economy is the 14^th largest in the wor= ld. This is because of the tradition that blood-related or biological parents are supposed to look after their= own children without too much childcare support by the government. The UN Child Rights Committee rates the Korean child care status quite low and demands v= ery many changes, systematically and financially. In Korea it is considered sin= ful or abnormal to look after someone else’s children, and when the Korean Foster Care Association started people consider the foster mothers barren a= nd strange social miscast. Korean child protection was based on institutional care. Korean War, which produced a huge number of orphans in 1950 when many institutions were being built for bringing up children in hide, isolated fr= om the public. As of 2002, orphanages or child-raising institutions held some 20,000 inmates and the government funds for 276 institutions (US$49.2 milli= on), which is 17.5 times more than the total foster care budget. The Korean publ= ic other than the child welfare experts, have not learned about, or are aware of the disadvantages = of institutionalization and children’s right to be treat fairly. Children are considered the possessions of their parents who own them. Therefore, th= ere are still many family suicides where parents kill their children first and = kill themselves which occurred a bit regularly during the Korean economic crisis from 1997-1999.

Koreans were not aware of other countries which abolished the institutional systems several decades ago but thought that other countries = are also keeping children in orphanages. They consider it proper to raise orpha= ns in isolated and out of touch social situations as the orphans are considere= d to be immoral. Children who do not have parents are considered condemned due to their bad behavior, sin accumulated from their previous lives. <= /span>

It is considered bad luck to take care of condemned people/children because of their past lives. Therefore the suitable places for orphanages a= re situated far from other people, in remote areas where few people live. The feeling of NIMBY against orpha= nages is still a very serious problem in Korea: grown-up orphans bring bad luck t= o neighbors and they tend to become criminals therefore my children should not become friendly with underprivileg= ed and needy children.

2. LACK OF SOCIAL AWARNESS OF UNCRC

Peop= le in Korea are not aware of the advantages and disadvantages of foster care and<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'> the harms to children by instituti= onal care. The government’s cost for institutional care may be greater than foster home up-bringing in the long run. By 2002, institutional care costs = 18 times more than foster care in Korea. Korea was not aware of instru= ments addressing the rights of ethnic minorities, women's rights and, children's rights until 1970s. People= were not aware that government has a responsibility to protect and promote unive= rsal respect for and fulfillment of human rights in their individual and joint actions. The Convention on the Rights of the Child= is a universally agreed set of standards and obligations, including Korea which ratified it in 1991, which places children at the center-stage in the quest= for a just, respectful and peaceful society. The schools and other children-rel= ated institutions are not aware of the UNCRC and no education or publicity effor= ts have been made so far. The Convention protects children’s rights by setting standards in health care, education, as well as l= egal, civil and social services. These standards are benchmarks against which progress can be assessed and States that ratify the Convention are obliged = to keep the best interests of the child in mind in their actions and policies, which is not occurring in Korea.

Just= over 50 years ago, with the crimes against humanity and human rights atrocities = of the Second World War still fresh in their minds, members of the internation= al community came together on 10 December 1948 to adopt a body of principles a= nd standards of behavior for all people, which was called the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Since 1948, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights has become the inspiration for national and international efforts to promote and protect human rights and fundamental freedoms.

Kore= an children must be taught in classes about the UNCRC and its four foundation principles: Non-discrimination (article 2); Best interests of the child (article 3); The child's right to life, survival and development (article 6= ); And r= espect for the views of the child (article 12). Every child –regardless = of where they are born, the race or ethnic group they belong to, whether they = are a boy or girl, rich or poor– must have a full opportunity to become a productive member of society and must have the right to speak up and be hea= rd. A child is a human being with the full range of rights.

3. LACK OF FINANCIAL SUPPORT BY THE GOVERNMENT

The Youth Family (the category accused by UN Child Rights Committee= as child abuse) or children heads of family are 11,390 children in 2002 receiv= ing US$57.9 million in total, which is 20.6 times more that the total foster ca= re budget. Of children in foster= care, 4,600 are mainly in relative foster care, and of those only 400 (by governm= ent record) are in non-relative foster care, which receive US$2.4 million.=

4. Concluding Observations on Korea by the UN Committee on the Righ= ts of the Child: Korea to improve on: (extract from the UN report)<= /span>

1) Group Homes and Foster Care: The UN Committee notes Korea’s establishment of group homes= as an alternative to the institutionalization of children separated from their families. However, it is conc= erned that the establishment of group homes and the development of the foster care system remain limited, and that private alternative care institutions are n= ot subject to governmental regulations or regular inspections. The Committee recommends that Korea:

(a) Continue to expa= nd the number of group homes and the foster care system, in particular by providing greater financial support to foster families and increasing the counseling and support mechanisms for foster families;

(b) Ensure a periodic review of placement of children in all public and private institutions, that takes into account the views and best interests of the child, and, wherever possible, aims to reintegrate children into a family environment;

(c) Increase the num= ber of social workers and upgrade their skills and capacity to provide assistan= ce to children in alternative care and to vulnerable families.

2) Adoption: The Committee remains concer= ned that, due to prevailing negative cultural traditions, domestic adoptions ma= y be arranged without authorization or involvement of the competent authorities = and that such arrangements do not necessarily take into account the best intere= sts of the child or, where appropriate, the views of the child. The Committee also notes with conc= ern the high number of intercountry adoptions, suggesting that this form of adoption is not necessarily a measure of last resort, and reiterates its concern, stated in previous concluding observations, that Korea has not ratified the Hague Convention of 1993 on Protection of Children and Coopera= tion in Respect of Intercountry Adoption. The Committee reiterates its previous recommendation to Korea and calls for:

(a) A comprehensive review of the system of domestic and inter-country adoptions with a view to reforming legislation in order to br= ing it into full conformity with the principles and provisions of the Conventio= n on the Rights of the Child, in particular article 21;

(b) The ratification of the Hague Convention of 1993 on Protection of Children and Cooperation in Respect of Inter-country Adoption= .

3) Child Abuse: T= he Committee recommends that Korea:

(a)= = Take all appropriate measures, including legislative reform, to establish a nati= onal system for receiving, monitoring, and investigating complaints of child abu= se and neglect, and, when necessary, prosecuting cases in a child-sensitive manner, and provide training for law enforcement officials, social workers = and prosecutors in this regard;

(b)= = Strengthen its efforts to establish Centers for the Prevention of Child Abuse in order= to develop a nationwide response system which is designed to provide, where appropriate, support and assistance to both victims and perpetrators of fam= ily violence, rather than solely intervention or punishment, and which ensures = that all victims of violence have access to counseling and assistance with recov= ery and reintegration;

(c) &n= bsp; Establish a mechanism for collecting data on the perpetrators and victims of abuse and neglect, disaggregated by gender and age, in order to assess properly the extent of these problems and design policies and programmes to address these concerns.

4) Child maintenance: The Commi= ttee is concerned at the high number of divorced and single parents, primarily mothers, who do not receive the child maintenance payments to which they are legally entitled. In the light of article 27 and the principle of the best interests of the child (art. 3), the Committee recommends that the State pa= rty take all effective measures to enforce child maintenance obligations based = on a court order or agreements between parties in a manner that does not stigmat= ize the child or his or her custodial parent.&= nbsp; For instance, the State party might consider establishing a national fund to ensure payment of overdue child maintenance obligations to the custodial parent while enforcement measures are enacted, or introducing a system in which child support payments are automatically deducted from sala= ries of those employees with child maintenance obligations.

IV. WORK IN PROGRESS BY KFCA

1. L= ONG TERM OBJECTIVES

1) F= oster Care Legislative Model; KFCA is drafting legislation that would allow foster care to be recognized under Korean Law; KFCA is also preparing a manual for foster care providers. Provide protection for foster children, foster care providers, and natural parents = and foster care organisations under Korean Law; Provide the same rights for fos= ter care children as children in institutions.

2) P= rovide a comprehensive survey of legislation relating to foster care, especially recent legislation, including: Children and Young Persons Act= of the UK ; and Children and Young People Act (1999) of the Australian Capital Territory, Canberra, Australia.

3) Provide statistics: Gender of foster children (male, female, average or typical age); Average or typical placement period; F= oster care children who require intervention from a number of agencies (for examp= le, disabilities, mental health issues and involvement in crime); Resources; for example, financial support for foster children and foster care pro= viders; Recruitment and traini= ng of foster care providers

= - = - Education and awareness of the benefits of fost= er care by the Civil Service and levels of government.

= - = - Advocacy for a law to enable and support the operation of foster care in Korea.
- Provision of training to Korean social wworkers and foster care providers = that is in line with International Best Practice
- Liaison and linkages with International foster care groups such as the International Foster Care Organisation (IFCO)
- Conduct research in Korea to ensure the best model of foster care for Koreans.
- Build a Professional Library and Resourcce Centre of International Best Pr= actice in the field of foster care

2. KOREAN FOSTER CARE LEGISLATION MODEL FROM TYPICAL INTERNATIONAL PRACTICE

There is no Foster Care-related legislation although sev= eral sentences of needs of foster care and some procedures or child placement in= the Child Welfare Law in Korea. The Korean Foster Care Association is geared to establish legislation on foster care in Korea. The Association in 2004 esta= blished a task force team. International Child Welfare Legislation is very precise about services and procedures for child protection and family services. This is especially so in the case = of substitute care where foster care is the normal and preferred means, after kinship care.

In international legislation:

= 1.&n= bsp; Legislation does not dictate that children be pla= ced in foster care, or in some other form of care unless there are identified or specific needs of a child. Child Welfare Legislation usually gives this rol= e to Child Welfare Agencies so they can decide what is best for each child.=

= 2.&n= bsp; While there is reference and prescription relatin= g to substitute care, foster care is often not mentioned specifically. Laws ment= ion foster care often in relation to:

1. Reg= istration or licensing of foster carers or agencies;

2. Pay= ment schedules to foster carers; and matters such as

3. Hea= lth insurance,

4. Clo= thing and other administrative arrangements for foster children and carers.<= /o:p>

= 3.&n= bsp; For a child to be removed from a family and place= d in substitute care a legal process applies in each case. Apart from strictly regulated emergency action, the courts decide that a period of substitute c= are is in the best interests of the child.

= 4.&n= bsp; If a child is to be placed in substitute care, parental rights are transferred from the natural parents to another person, usually a senior or responsible civil servant, for a determined period. Thi= s is the role of the Court in all the legislative examples listed.

= 5.&n= bsp; While the focus of this summary is on foster care, legislation regarding adoption is much more prescriptive. In some jurisdict= ions adoption from foster care is supported while in others, such support is administrative, that is, subject to the professional assessment of involved agencies.

= 6.&n= bsp; The application of existing substitute care laws = in Korea does not tend to involv= e the Courts. Legislation that involves processes and procedures that do not invo= lve a Children’s or Family Court would be of special interest in the fram= ing of a Korean law in this area.

1) INTRODUCTION

In many countries, current legislation that allows or affects the operation of foster care is found in social welfare, family or child protection legislation. The purpose of this summary is to detail some recent and central examples of legislation that could be used as a guide for similar or amended legislation in Korea. Examples of legislation are taken = from California and Texas in the US, Canada, England and Wales in the United Kin= gdom and Victoria, and the Australian Capital Territory in Australia.=

2) DEFINITIONS

Substitute Care is where care and protection (including accommodation) is provided to a child away from their natural or birth parents or legal guardians. Substitute Care is a legal power, made as= an authorized decision, or as an order issued by a Court. The Parental Role or Mandate= is transferred temporarily from the natural parents to another person who h= as the power to make decisions for the child.

Foster Care is where a Child Welfare Agency asks a Foster Care Agency to provide a foster care placement for a child who is unable to live at home for a fixed or determined period.

A Child Welfare Agency is, typically, a government agency with legislative responsibility for the safety and protec= tion of children, support of families. Non-government agencies may also undertake some prescribed aspects of a Child Welfare Agency.

Foster Care Agencies train and recruit foster care= rs and provide such support to the child and/or foster carers as is required by the case plan for the child.

A Foster Care Placement is a legal or autho= rized transfer of parental role or mandate from a child’s natural or birth parents to foster parents who are under the support and direction of a foster care agency.

A Parental Role or Mandate is w= here a parent cares for and makes decisions for a child. A Parental Role or Man= date may be transferred from natural or birth parents by an administrative or Co= urt process. Such a process typically transfers the Parental Role or Mandate= to a statutory position (such as a Cabinet Minister, or an appropriate Civil Service position, typically within a Child Protection or Child Welfare Agency.

The importance of making decisions in the Best Intere= sts of the Child is commonly phrased. This is because there may be a confli= ct or disagreement amongst people or parties who are involved in a child’= ;s case (parents, substitute care provider (including a foster care agency, Ch= ild Welfare Agency etc).

A Voluntary Care Agreement is a process tha= t is described or allowed in a law where a conference or meeting takes place with people relevant to a child’s situation or case. A facilitator convene= s a meeting with a child’s parents, relatives, social worker, health professional, teachers and others who have a role in the case plan. In Australia (Australian Capital Territory) and New Zealand, the signed Volunt= ary Care Agreement, arising out of a conference, is registered with a Court and then has the same effect as if a Court made the order.

3) SOCIAL WELFARE OR FAMILY LEGISLATION

Legislation governing substitute care and adoption tends= to be incorporated within Social Welfare or Family legislation. Example include the following:

TABLE 1: TYPICAL SOCIAL WELFARE LEGISLATION

Country	State or Province	Legislation
Un= ited States	Ca= lifornia	Ca= lifornia Family Code
	Te= xas	Te= xas Statutes
Ca= nada	National	Ch= ild Youth & Family Service Act 2001
Au= stralia	Vi= ctoria	Ch= ildren and Young Persons Act 1989
	Au= stralian Capital Territory	Ch= ildren & Young People Act 2001
Un= ited Kingdom	En= gland and Wales	Ch= ildren’s Act 1989

There are several common aspects to the above examples of legislation. Principally, they are that:

1. F= oster Care tends not to be specified in legislation governing placement of childr= en away from their natural or birth parents. Instead, a child is provided with substitute care, is taken into care, or is provided with suitable care and accommodation.

2. W= hile Foster care is from time to time referred to in legislation, more generic t= erms tend to be applied to the notion that a child in need is provided with accommodation away from the family by someone who is not part of the family= , usually a government agency.

3. C= are Placements are decided by Courts and the wishes of the courts are carried o= ut by government agencies that use or purchase the services of providers such = as foster care agencies.

4. Ultimate parental responsibility for children in need of care is undertaken= by a civil servant or may also be called an authorised person. This is:=

i. Because a Court has ordered that parental powers be transferred for a defined period; and/or;

ii. As “emergency action= ”. Laws often give Child Welfare or Child Protection agencies the power to tak= e “emergency action” so a child can be removed from a family because it is not in = his or her best interests to stay. These emergency powers only last:=

iii. Until the child can be brought before a Court as soon as possible (24 – 48 hours is typical) where the facts of the case can be presented along with proposals for a case plan or outcome(s)

5. Legislation involving children specifies t= hat plans that are made for children be in the best interests of the child, and= if there is a conflict between what is best for the child and the views of oth= er parties, the best interest principle shall apply.

6. The importance of a coordin= ated approach to a child’s needs is expressed in requirements for case pla= ns and integrated case management involving those who have an active role in providing care to a child.

4) VOLUNTARY CARE AGREEMENTS=

As described in the definiti= on section, a Voluntary Care Agreement is a process that allows parents, social workers and other involved people to reach agreement about the best options= for a child. The aim is to reach agreement with the parents instead of obliging them to be involved as a Court can do. As the aim of substitute care is to = plan for reunion of a child with his or her natural parents or family, voluntary care agreements are considered important.

This type of agreement may be very useful for a Korean law because it reflects some of the processes that occur at present, as foster care agencies negotiate with parents over the conditions of a voluntary foster care agreement.

5) SPECIFIC REFERENCES IN LEGISLATION TO SUBSTITUTE CARE THAT ARE RELEVANT TO FOSTER CARE<= /span>

Note: The following examples are summarised from the accompanying document, Legislative Examples Referring to Foster Care. Please refer to this document for more details of the examples below.<= /o:p>

Example 1.

Australian Capital Territory, Australia: Children and Yo= ung Persons Act 1989

An interesting aspect= of this law is the support for voluntary agreements. The law describes the set= ting up of family conferences to resolve care and protection issues for a child = or young person. An agreement arising out of such a conference can be register= ed with a Court and if the Court accepts the registration, it has the same eff= ect as a Court Order.

Example 2.

Victoria, Australia: Children and Young Persons Act 1989=

i. In this law, a civil servant, in t= his case, the Secretary or Permanent Head of a Government Agency, can be granted custody (parental role or mandate) of a child by a court and can delegate t= he powers to care for the child whose custody has been transferred. A foster c= are agency would be involved at the request of the person with delegated powers= .

ii. Of special relevance is the power = to approve a community service to meet the needs of children requiring protect= ion, care or accommodation. A Foster Care Agency would be treated as a community service. Note that foster care is not named.

iii. This law authorises the Secretary to approve commun= ity services “to meet the needs of children requiring protection, care or accommodation”. This is relevant to foster care.

Example 3.

United Kingdom – Childrens Act 1989

i. This law provides that a “lo= cal authority” (equivalent to 구, 시 etc) will “pro= vide accommodation to children in need within their area who appears to them to require accommodation…(as a result of needing care and protection)= 221;

ii. The UK law provides a hierarchy of accommodation by directing a local authority to place a child with a family, relative or any other suitable person. This is clearly in recognition of fo= ster care.

Example 4.

Canada Child Youth & Family Services Act 2001=

i. This law lists the factors that mu= st be considered “…when determining a child’s best interests, including

(a) the child’s safety;

(b) the child’s developmental needs;

(d) where possible, the child’s views and wishes;

(e) the importance of stability in the child’s care;

(f) the continuity of the child’s relationship with his or her family, includ= ing siblings or others with whom the child has a significant relationship;=

(and other points)

These above principles are principles that are best met through foster care.

Example 5.

United States – California Code Section 7950-7952 Foster Care Placement Considerations.

This law does not spe= cify that children should be placed into foster care. Rather, it sets out the considerations that must be considered when a foster care placement is being made. The importance of a placement with a relative is stressed, and then t= he directive that a child who is to go into foster care should not be discriminated against on the basis of race, colour or national origin of the foster parent of child.

Example 6.

United States = – Texas Statutes, Child Welfare Services

The Texas code details procedures for contracting Substitute care Service, and for monitoring fost= er parent performance as well as details for placement of children into “= ;contract residential care including foster care”. There is also a section that allows the assessment and performance of foster carers.

6) FOSTER CARE AND ADOPTION

International legislation is very specific and precise in relation to adoption. This is because adoption involves a significant and p= ermanent change in a child’s life. Foster care is a temporary period of substi= tute care, although this period can be measured in years.

Many of the professional skills such as assessment and c= ase monitoring are similar between the substitute care and the adoption process. Many of t= he skills of the foster carer are similar to the desired skills of an adopting family. Foster carers are accustomed to the concept of ongoing training, of building a professional relationship with foster care agency staff. The tra= nsition from foster carer to adoptive carer, although challenging is likely to be m= uch smoother in the case of experienced foster carers. The child will benefit f= rom the skills of the foster carer along with the potential smoothness of the transition.

It makes sense, therefore, that foster carers who wish to adopt be supported to the extent that it is in the best interests of the ch= ild for this to occur.

7) SUMMARY

International child welfare legislation does not make ne= at and clear reference to foster care. Rather, legislation specifies arrangeme= nts and procedures relating to a process of providing substitute care, for example, decisions being made = in the best interests of the child; and the licensing of community agencies

The extent to which foster care is used as a form of substitute care rests with government child welfare agencies whose role is = to interpret legislation to provide child care and protection services. The fa= ct that such agencies employ professional staff (including registered or licen= sed social welfare, psychology, mental health workers) allows them to make professional judgements as to the most appropriate course of action when a = case involving a child is referred.

8) RECOMMENDATIONS

= &nb= sp; i. &nb= sp; = That legislation in Korea refer to substitute care and recognise that foster care is a significant means of substitute care;

= ii. &n= bsp; = ; That the operation of foster care be subject to regulation and audit

= iii. &= nbsp; &nbs= p; That the principle of “the best interests of the child” be a central aspect of any legislation

= iv. &n= bsp; = ; That the concept of voluntary agreements and fami= ly conferences be incorporated into Korean legislation.

= v. &nb= sp; = That International best practice minimum standards apply to providers of substitute care, including foster care;

= vi. &n= bsp; = ; That the foster parent’s parenting capacity, skills and the best interest principle for the child be an important consideration in the case of

= vii. &= nbsp; &nbs= p; adoption from foster care.

INSTITUTIONS