Fighting for Change
By Sharon Perkins, NYS Adoptive Parent writing for Fostering Families Magazine
Reprinted with permission of the author.
As a teenager, I thought about what I wanted in life. Marrying a great guy, having a couple of children, being a stay-at-home mom and doing something good for the world by adopting kids in need of a good home were my dreams. Miraculously, all went according to plan, and the last dream came true in 1975. We adopted a brother and sister when they were ages 5 and 4. Along with our two biological daughters, 12 and 10 at the time, the adoption completed our family.
These two children had been through a lot in their short lives. Removed from their home at ages 1½ and 6 months, they spent the next four years in two successive foster homes. Early parental abuse and neglect left them with disabilities, both physical and emotional, which officially classified them as disabled. No subsidy or adoption assistance was available to help us care for them back then. However, we were told that our financial responsibility ended when the children were 21, just like all children.
Life continued, though not without serious problems to overcome. However, I was happy for an added excuse to do what I loved and enjoy fun things when I had time, along with the routine chores as a stay-at-home mom. Little did I know the price I would have to pay for this luxury would be so damaging.
In 1996, our local Social Security office told my husband Ray the amount he would receive at retirement. Since I hadn't worked enough quarters to qualify for my own retirement, I would receive half of his amount. In 2002, he filed for his Social Security retirement and was told our two adult disabled children, then 32 and 31 and living independently, would be switched from Supplemental Security Income to Social Security. The amount they received would stay the same, so we assumed it was only a name change.
In 2004, prior to my eligibility for retirement benefits, we again visited the Social Security office. We were shocked to find out that due to a “family maximum” clause, my half payment would have to be divided between all adult disabled children and me. Section 202(d) of the Social Security Act, pertinent to this case, provides for the payment of benefits to the wage earner’s children, including adopted children, if they were classified as disabled before age 22. Section 203(1), however, limits the total benefit amount paid monthly on an individual’s earning record. Even if my husband died, the situation would be the same. The only exception is if I divorce my husband, I can collect the full amount.
I thought my purpose in life was to serve our children as a stay-at-home mom and help them through their disabilities. As far as I was concerned, I had already fulfilled my life’s mission. Now I have discovered this new challenge. After learning from our own situation, I realized this law affects many others. I began campaigning to change it. Anyone who knows me will tell you I am the last person to be an activist for anything. When all this began, I didn’t even know how to turn on our computer.
I began bombarding the Social Security system with questions and calling every adoption organization I could find in my local phone book. From every one, I got the same comments: “We’ve never heard of this,” or “There must be some mistake.”
After many calls, someone told me I needed to contact Judith Ashton, executive director of the New York State Citizen’s Coalition for Children. She listened to my story with concern and disbelief and promised to help me. She has been my angel in this fight, and I couldn’t do this without her help. She told me everything I needed to do, from contacting Congress members to keeping a record of every phone call and learning to use the computer. Also, her many connections became very useful.
With new initiatives to find homes for kids, including the AdoptUSKids three-year campaign focusing on foster and special needs children, I believe recruiters need to be honest with prospective adoptive and foster parents. Couples need to be aware of the consequences they face when adopting special needs kids, especially if one of them chooses to stay home instead of work. The current Social Security laws hurt parents later on. It is unfair to the people who are trying to help kids who desperately need loving families.
For my whole life, I have had a heart for foster children. The last thing I want to do is jeopardize their chance to have a safe, secure and happy future. On the other hand, the only way we are going to correct this situation is to get the word out. Do stay-at-home moms deserve punishment when our only crime is providing special needs children with stability and loving homes? Is this our government’s way of thanking us when we reach our retirement years?
Changing this law will not be easy. It comes under the Senate Finance Committee, and Congress must pass a bill. There are two ways to resolve this injustice. The first is to change Supplemental Security Income law. The critical provision is 42 USC Sec. 1382(e)(2). It needs to be amended to allow adult children to remain on Supplemental Security Income even after parents apply for Social Security benefits. The other option is to pass a provision to the Social Security Act waiving practice of the family maximum clause, at least when adult children are living outside the family home. New York State’s Sen. Charles Schumer is now a member of the Finance Committee. I received word from his Washington office that the committee is aware of this problem and is drafting language to exempt disabled adult children from contributing to the family maximum clause. Unfortunately, they have not yet had the opportunity to attach it to an appropriate bill.
Meanwhile, our battle continues. We feel we must appeal because accepting the situation indicates we agree with this law. We have filed for reconsideration and were denied. We have had to hire a lawyer to move to the next phase, an administrative law judge hearing. Even if we win that, which is highly unlikely, we will continue fighting to change this ridiculous law. How can there be a law stating we are no longer financially responsible for our children after they are 21, when another law requires us to be financially responsible forever through our Social Security benefits. We have been told these circumstances are an unintended consequence of Social Security law. Nevertheless, it is the law.
If the present law affects you or will in the future, please join in our efforts to bring about change. Contact me at sperkins317@yahoo.com to share your story or if you have any questions or recommendations. We encourage everyone to support our cause by writing to your Congressmembers, and especially Senator Max Baucus of Montana, Chair of the Senate Finance Committee. By helping to change this unjust law, many waiting children and adoptive families will benefit.
Sharon Perkins grew up in Webster, NY, a suburb of Rochester. She graduated from Alfred State College, where she met her husband, Ray. After working briefly as a secretary, they were married in 1963. While her four children attended school, Sharon babysat for working mothers, was a Girl Scout leader, and taught Sunday school. Summers, the family spent much time at Cuba Lake, Cuba, NY, where she and Ray presently live following his retirement. They are very active in their Church. Sharon teaches an adult Sunday school class, is coordinator for its Care Network, and food purchaser for their food pantry. She and Ray also enjoy volunteering at Family Life Ministries, a Christian youth center/radio network in their area, as well as driving for the county’s Office of the Aging. They love to spend time with their family, especially their two grandchildren.
Download Adoptive Family in pdf format
Back to Articles Directory Back to NYSCCC Home Page
NYS Citizens' Coalition for Children, Inc.
410 East Upland Road • Ithaca, NY 14850
607-272-0034 • Fax: 607-272-0034
office@nysccc.org