Reasons why children become available for adoption?(141 Posts)
Re children available for adoption at either Local Authority or private adoption agencies, is any detailed information provided as to why they were removed from their natural parent(s)?
fightforjustice, your facts are wrong.
And this will get you nowhere.
Search the site; you will see that here in the adoption corner we are used to people coming on shouting at us about forced adoption. All of us have engaged in far too many threads like this and I think most of us are tired of it. Whatever your reasons for wanting to spread your message, this is truly not the right way to do so.
misspollysdolly these threads may be old and unpleasant BUT THEY ARE EXPOSING THE TRUTH ABOUT SS.
THE TRUTH MAY HURT BUT IT DOESNT HALF HURT AS MUCH AS IT HAPPENING TO YOUR FAMILY.
WHY SHOULD PEOPLE LEAVE IT ?????????????????
IT THAT SO THE SS CAN GET AWAY WITH RIPPING MORE FAMILIES APART FOR NO GOOD REASON APART FROM TO GET THERE ARGET FIGURES AND BONUSES ??????????
Can I just say...why, Why, WHY are old and unpleasant threads like this getting dredged up for another churning...?!
Leave it people
message to all ............... social services have all got adoption targets set out by the goverment and when each local authority reaches their set target they get a cash bonus from the goverment for reaching the target to have so many children adopted in their area during a certain time period. alot of the children that social services take from their parents are loved and cared for but they are taken anyway. the social services then use professionals who will write up false reports which are them used in court to get the child adopted. this is fact. google forced adoption or look up the social workers that have been found out to have provided false reports to court and used them in court to back up their case against the childs parents. (cafcass workers also do this and some have even been taken to court over the said reports) also a doctor who has been found out to be doing false reports is Dr HIBBERT (google him and have a look for yourselves.
the social worker said I'd need a lawyer for the big hearing, but social services don't lose cases anyway, so he would be adopted.
My own theory, is not that social workers are on a mission to snatch up as many babies as possible, but that, very seasoned social workers who are probably past caring having been in the game too lomng, can make dangerous assumptions, and make it so vulnerable new mothers don't get all the chances they should be given. Perhaps these SWs think there's no point in giving the chances, so they build cases up where they don't tell new mums of their rights and support available, they mislead them, and build up a case to adopt the baby out without letting the mother know.
I believe they did this with me, and I think that's why I wasn;t given an opportunity in a mother and baby unit (as the child gaurdian stood up in court and said why the hell wasn't I already offered that support). I think they did not tell me I should have had my own social worker due to being a young vulnerable person, because they wanted they wanted to get the adoption through quicker and not waste funds messing around.
I think they did not tell me I could have had my child back at any time and that he was just in voluntry care, because they were waiting for me to not collect him back over a period of time, so they could get the intrim care order.
They lied about how I'd be arrested if I tried to take my baby home at a time when I had every legal right to do so.
They lied about how I would have him back soon and theyre just waiting on this and that. And they kept it all from my until last minutes, and told me in the bloody evening that the next morning they'd be getting and intrim court order as they want to put him for adoption, and they lied that I would not need to attend that court hearing and there's no point in doing so.
They knew I was clueless and had no chance of hgetting a soliciter in time to protest the intrim care order. They didn't even tell me I could have protested the order, they said it was just paperwork.
Absolutely everything that happened seemed to prove that they could really be bothered to spend their time supporting us, when they assumed I'd probably fail.
So they built up an entire case, just to try and go through the motions of giving me a fair trial, but there was no fair chances at all.
And if they do this with other people, as I read about, then that should show why I have this conspiracy about SS.
duchesse, I'm surprised SS haven't taken her children already.
I was in a refuge and was told by workers that they had seen SS take children when the woman had gone back to an abuser, no ifs, no buts, no second chances.
I'm sure you're experiences of what you've seen and heard are completely different to mine.
But there's no need to say 'come off it' and get sarcastic.
I didn't say abuse doesn't happen.
I'm saying that despite whether or not there was neglect/abuse, there WILL be either documented, if there wasn't a forced adoption wouldn't have happened, so it's simple logic.
However, accounts of neglect or how the parent probably would have neglected aren't always accurate.
There are some inaccuracies on my son's file.
There's no proof of neglect or abuse to my child at all.
He was adopted because it was said that I could have possibly caused him emotional distress in the future.
Absolutely, Kew. It feels really uncomfortable when these threads get polarised as though birth parents and adoptive parents are mutual enemies whose interests must always be pitted against each other. BECAUSE I love my dd I wish that she hadn't had to be taken from her birth family, with all that entailed and will continue to entail. BECAUSE I love my dd, I feel desperately sorry for her birth parents who didn't want her to go and who are missing out on a very special little girl. BUT part of the experience of adoption is coming to terms with the reasons our dc got taken into care, and then helping our dc to come to terms with it. I have real evidence of the harm caused to my daughter by her birth mother - including in utero - plenty enough to convince me that my dd is where she needs to be.
I don't doubt that injustice happens. I've met brilliant social workers and also ones so crap that I can't imagine the harm they could cause in a child protection context. I imagine the other adopters here would all agree with me when I say that we have no reason to doubt you, we certainly don't doubt the possibility of what you say happened to you, but that doesn't mean that the entire system of adoption is corrupt and that we are keeping our children from responsible, loving parents. It's just such a pointless debate to keep having, and it would be good to move on from.
I don't doubt that there are injustices on both sides of this debate and have been on both sides (supporting a friend who was accused of abuse and investigated as well as an adoptive parent).
If social workers remit is to remove babies to get them adopted as seems to be the public perception then they are doing a really shit job of it as they predominantly remove children who are hard to place. By far and away the smallest proportion of children taken into care are preschool children who go on to be adopted.
I don't know another adopter who doesn't have physical proof of their childs injuries/neglect where the child was removed eg cigarette burns, video evidence taken by neighbours or the child being old enough to explain what life was like. That doesn't mean that I don't accept that cases like yours, Fred, don't exist and I'm not sure why you feel that adopters have such a rosy view of the system when we have all been through it and are intimately acquainted with its failings.
Tbh as an adopter I get a bit tired of having to justify time and time again why the majority of children are removed and placed for adoption fairly and in some cases too late.
I said this about a year ago earlier on in the thread:
"I'm not naive, I have come across social workers who have an agenda and I'm sure there are miscarriages of justice occasionally and for those families it is heartbreaking. BUt as adopters on here have told you, that isn't our experience. Not one of us have either children who where forcibly removed without a serious degree of neglect or know anyone in the same boat (unless relinquishment is voluntary)"
I don't want to say too much but I know of a young woman who is living a dangerous game with social services with her four young children. She is a good mum but her partner is a violent drug addict with a history of violence towards her and who has been violent to their toddler son. She KEEPS going back to him, even after having been put in a safe house by her SW a long way away from him after a botched (by the CPA) court case against him.
She objects vehemently to what she sees as SS intrusion but refuses to see that she is putting her children in danger merely by allowing their father back into her life all the time. It is like watching a car crash in slow motion.
Many adopted children can speak for themselves, and do, about what life was like for them in their first homes.
Many adopted children have indisputable evidence of harm e.g. injuries, neonatal drug withdrawal, fetal alcohol syndrome.
Many adopters meet the biological parents these days, and many will also know how older siblings in the family are doing.
I'm sure there are unjust cases, but all the evidence I have seen points to the conclusion that neglected and abused children are removed from their families too little, rather than too often.
When injustice does occur, it needs to be exposed. But that isn't helped by suggesting conspiracy theories, that hard-pressed, under-resourced social workers are hellbent on invading happy families and concocting a web of fantasies about what goes on there.
Our friends who recently adopted a sibling group have been finding out more and more about their children's life before adoption as the children casually reveal details. It's quite shocking. And these were kids who were removed for neglect.
Oh come off it
I've never heard one adopter say that they didn't think their children had it that bad in their first home.
On the other hand, I have personal experience of them downplaying and hiding abuse. And I have heard a LOT of adopters fining out that things had been hidden from them (ie. knowledge of sexual abuse, medical conditions in the birth family and so on). Sadly there is an incentive for them to HIDE abuse from the profiles because the children are easier to find homes for then.
"Of course they will say that, they have to, to get the adoption through."
It's not about saying that. It's about PROVING it. Which they do have to do
Yes, it's very easy to fake bruises/burns/broken bones. Maybe the children's disclosures of sexual abuse were faked as well, even when on police tapes. And the positive drug tests the birth parents took.
I can say with total honesty, that I have never seen a single adoption profile for any child, where the child had not been described by social workers as having suffered physically/sexually abuse or suffered severe neglect.
Of course they will say that, they have to, to get the adoption through.
There probably is usually neglect or abuse, but I suspect there are many unjust cases that you don't know about, because you're only reading one side of events.
OP_ I think if the children are lucky, they're only severely neglected or have a substance dependent mother with a poor choice of life partner.
If they're even luckier, they are the 7th child and removed at birth because all the older ones have been taken into care and the mother is not fit to look after them. Three cases of recentish adoptees (within the last 15 years) that I know of.
I can say with total honesty, that I have never seen a single adoption profile for any child, where the child had not been physically/sexually abused or suffered severe neglect. And I've seen a lot of them. I am sure there are cases where mistakes were made, I don't doubt that, but saying that that is 'usually' the case is going too far.
While children may usually be removed for good reasons, from what I've seen it isn't usually the case that they're removed.
The parents are manipulated into agreeing to voluntry care with threats of 'we'll remove them anyway, but it will be better for you to agree to it if you want to get them back in future.'
When the child is in voluntry care social services gather up other reasons to apply for an intrim care order.
In my case, the got an intrim care order after 6 months, saying I didn't have appropriate housing, hadn't actually asked for my child back etc..
Of course I had asked for him back many timesand they said no.
I didn't know it was actually voluntry care until they had the intrim care order.
But then again I wouldn't have known, as they didn't give me my own social worker as they should have- as I was also a child.
I'm a birth mother and do wonder what my son's adoptive parents were told. They were brought onto the scene by social services while I was trying to fight to get my child back.
The adoptive parents knew that it was possible that I may win and he would come back to me, but as I lost, they got my son.
I put up a good fight in court and had support from a few different professionals who helped try to tell the judge in court; I hadn't done anything wrong, I just need support and a chance.
Social services won in having him adopted however so didn't have to pay out all the funds for supporting us in staying together.
The adoptive parents know I didn't do anythign wrong and I love my child.
I don't have anything against them, they've turned out to be good parents to my boy. And they're good to me too, in all they send to me.
There may even be a chance of me meeting my son again when he starts secondary school. Fingers crossed. It's all good.
But yes, I've had social services do breif checks when I had children after that, and they said it was very unclear the reasons for the first adoption being enforced.
It would be difficult for them to put reasons across for the adoption when their reason aren't necessarily comprehendable reason for many others.
In my case 'risk of possible future emotional harm' was what the judge said at the final hearing.
My two younger children, (born only 4yrs+ later) are fine with me though.
Their decisions for 'reasons for a adoption' in my experience, are at the very least; questionable.
This thread is about adoptons though, not social services?
After my poor Sisters treatment by social services, I have nightmares about ss turning up on my doorstep. She was failed badly, both by ss and my parents, it was all a bit of a nightmare.
I literally have had weeks of nightmares after reading threads on here about malicious reporting. I would love to live in a world where Social workers were fully trained and supported. Where "bad apples" were weeded out, transparency was the name of the game, also enough social workers around, that they could actually do their job, instead of fire fighting.
I shouldn't be scared of social services, I should be confident that my children are happy and fed and clothed and looked after to my own standards. But if they turned up on my doorstep I would shit myself.
Why is that? Because of all the stories of innocent people losing their children.
I realise that these cases are rare, but they do exist, and they put the fear of God into parents everywhere.
My Ds2 managed to break his leg on his first birthday, he fell down the side of the sofa, accident, could have been prevented by pushing sofa to the wall, hindsight is a wonderful thing.
We were made to feel like criminals at A&E, we were asked for our "versions" of the story about 10 times, ds2 was stripped and examined, he had a bit of oreo juice on his nappy(only food available was vending machines), which the paediatrician noticed, she said ds2 had a dirty nappy(poo), I did correct her.
She explained to us that because he had a fracture before 18 months she had to go through child protection protocol, which I was fine with, our other children were with us, I'm surprised she didn't ask to strip search them too.
She had to get the go ahead to "release" us from a consultant and thankfully thought we posed no harm to our children. Even the frigging receptionist kept staring at us for the 6 hours we were there.
I do "get" it after baby P, but lets face it, there was quite a bit more to the baby p case than one random A&E attendance.
I was actually half expecting a ss visit after ds2's injury.
Dear misdiagnosis, it sounds like you have had a horrendous time and I'm very sorry for that. I don't believe that any of the adoptive parents on here would say 'no smoke without fire', and I think many of us have said that (a) the system needs reform, and (b) there are doubtless miscarriages of justice and they are horrendous for both parents and child. I for one would love to have a thoughtful, informed discussion on how things could be improved, and were it not for the constant taunting, bullying and misinformation provided by these strange guys that might be possible.
I don't have any advice but I hope you are getting some good advice from somewhere?
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.