At least, with foster care, there is a chance you could end up in a family situation that could be healthy. Governments subsistence for fostering turned it into a cash grab not to mention the closet pedophiles and their motivations. Orphans have it tough.
The answer is they're both worse.
But if you were forced to pick the worse of the two?
It's like the question, do you want your left or your right arm cut off?
Well, I'm right handed, so left arm :P
That is a hard one since both of them are likely for the child to be abused mentally, physically and probably sexually. I would assume foster care might be worse for the sexual abuse but I have read some horror stories about how old orphanages and boarding schools were ran so I am not sure that is right.
I guess the answer is "yes".
It would depend where, when, and what people are involved. In both cases it could be just fine but in both cases it could also be horrific.
If in the foster system they might at least be in a "family" and have a more "normal" life as long as the parents are not garbage. I knew some foster kids. The parents seemed ok when I knew them but the kids all turned out pretty bad and ended up as druggies at a very young age.
I never knew a kid/person that grew up in a orphanage.
I never knew a kid/person that grew up in a orphanage
I think theyre largely extinct in English speaking countries. Replaced by foster care.
I largely agree with you, given how horrible both are. 40 years ago I might have leaned more into Orphanage, but now, I lean more to foster care given how many people are in it purely to game the system. The few people I knew from foster care were exactly as you said, drug addicts and societal check-outs. I can't help but wonder if a different environment with many more kids around might have affected their growth. Mental experiment: would Voldemort have been different in foster care?
They are called group homes now.