> Actually, the major driver of pushback against these diagnoses in foster care in my experience is former foster children I don't get it, you accuse me of con

> Actually, the major driver of pushback against these diagnoses in foster care in my experience is former foster children I don't get it, you accuse me of conspiracy and then claim this is all because of a conspiracy by the children, the victims. And victims is the correct word because VERY few foster children had any hand in or possibility to influence their placement at all, and the vast majority, as the paper says too, are "marginal", meaning their placement was the choice of the social services investigator. I'm sure it's nevertheless all their fault and they deserve it, and the social workers who are totally financially dependent on robbing them of their home just don't have . Besides, those are children have experienced firsthand the consequences of social workers' help, and really didn't want that help, don't want it now, and will never want it. Who would know better than they do? Nobody would. > let's jump to a conspiracy theory about bad social workers instead You have met some social workers, right? Bad is the standard there. Even outright malevolence is not rare. Hidden agendas and lies are the norm in youth protection social workers, because if they told the truth to children, it'd be comical: "do you want my help? We can take everything from you, friends, parents, school, ... everything, declare you sick with 20 diagnoses and if we start now we can have you in prison before you're 20. Yes almost all foster children become criminals. So do you want our help?". Children will be running in tears to abusers begging them to take them back ... The system for helping children is a bad joke.