Placement For A Child In Paula Hawkins's Into The Water

Upon recently reading the novel Into the Water by Paula Hawkins, several competing ideas have emerged. One such idea is regarding the discussion of whether a child in foster care be placed with their closest adult relative or with a stranger. On the one hand, some argue that a kid should stay within the family. On the other hand, there are those who would argue that an unrelated family that takes in the adolescent, would care for them just as equally. As stated on the Child Welfare Information Gateway, under the “title IV-E of the Social Security Act requires that they ‘consider giving preference to an adult relative over a non-related caregiver when determining placement for a child, provided that the relative caregiver meets all relevant

State child protection standards’” (childwelfare.gov). According to this view, children should be set up with direct relatives. In sum, then, the two ideas center around whether having a genetic or non-genetic relation to a minor matters when it comes to placing them in a loving home.
My own view is that having a kid live with the closest adult in their family is the ethical thing to do. Though I concede that blood relatives aren’t always the appropriate option when placing the child, I still maintain that they should stay with the only family they have left. For example, when Lena’s mom, Nel, died, she was placed with her aunt Jules to live with since Jules had the closest relation to her; being the sister of Nel. Although some might object that close family members are unsuitable for taking care of a child, I would reply that they are in fact suitable due to the idea that they know more about the kid than a stranger would. Keeping this view in mind is important because a child should have the right to stay with the only connection they have, to not only their family and ancestors, but to their life.