'I almost lost my son'

(64 Posts)
Itcouldhappentoanymum Sat 28-Apr-12 10:56:10

Is this really the best way to protect our children?

www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/magazine/article3393674.ece

Lilka - As the law stands, the family is protected in our Constitution under Article 42. This is the family of birth, so as the law stands, the state has an obligation to put the birth family first before what is actually best for the child. After the changes, the rights of the child will have status and recognition so the birth parent wishes can be overridden (is that a word??) So in practice, children who will never be allowed back to birth parents for whatever reason (like our sort of foster dd) will be allowed to be adopted. It will - hopefully- bring about positive change for a lot of children who are in long term care.

Devora Sat 01-Dec-12 23:26:54

Ah, that makes sense FN. I was wondering what was going on.

Lilka Sat 01-Dec-12 20:33:26

Happy - What will the change in law mean for children in care? Can children be adopted without parental consent when it goes through?

MaryChristmaZEverybody Sat 01-Dec-12 17:19:44

I have reported mysecretworld by the way, not just for starting this and other threads, and for bumping old threads, but for giving factually incorrect information that might frighten mothers with PND for example from going for help.

I'm also in Ireland, where sadly children can spend their whole lives in foster care as there is no adoption of older children here - only very rare adoption of relinquished babies, about a dozen a year or fewer.

The really awful think about foster care is that the children have no rights; often they can't go abroad on family holidays, their foster parents often can't sign for schools/exams/healthcare, if one of the foster carers loses their job/income/home or if they split up the children go back into care and have to start again.

Not being adopted is awful for children who are in care.

FellatioNelson Sat 01-Dec-12 17:15:04

I think possibly these new threads are coming from people who have come here from NM. There are a group of people on there who have had their children removed from them by SS and they genuinely seem to believe that there is a conspiracy against poor working class women by the government to snatch their babies to fulfill adoption quotas for middle class couples.

They are wrong, obviously.

When the people you refer to know there is no chance of them having their children back of course they would agree to adoption.

I'm in Ireland and provided respite foster care for 10 years for a child who was/is in care. Her birth mother vehemently opposed her being fostered, let alone adopted. In her mind, if she kept fighting, she would eventually get her dd and her ds back. This was NEVER going to happen. I'm not going to post why in case anyone IRL knows me and will therefore know FosterDD. She was in care from 8 months of age with no chance of her being returned to her BM. She grew up for most of her life in a foster family where when she misbehaved (and she did regularly) she was told 'I'm ringing the social worker and you're going back.' NO child should grow up like that, with constant uncertainty. If she was in the UK, she would have had a chance of being adopted which she so needed.

We had a Children's Referendum here in November which, when enacted into legislation, will mean that children like her will have a better chance in life. We had all the same scare stories doing the rounds here - the social workers were going to be going into people's houses and taking their children and putting them up for adoption etc. The reality is that there will be the same numbers of children in care but hopefully children like our (sort of) foster DD won't be in long-term care but will be adopted.

Devora Fri 30-Nov-12 23:51:20

Absolutely right, Lilka. It's a fantasy to think that people who can't cope with parenting, who neglect and abuse their children, are rational, consequential thinkers who will make the right choice for the child.

I expect everyone who's had involvement with the system will have come across birth mothers who have had several children, all of them taken away, the last ones at birth, but who keep producing more children for the care system in the deluded hope that one day they'll get lucky and be allowed to keep one sad

Lilka Fri 30-Nov-12 23:32:24

Also, many parents just don't understand how poor their parenting is. They could have their child in a freezing filthy house with nearly no food and no safety for weeks on end resulting in permanent damage and serious delays and they would have no clue they's done anything wrong. They would see themselves as a good parent, because they love their child and want them. Maybe they've been treated like that and see it as normal. They probably have drug, alcohol and mental health problems. No one can change unless they want to change. If someone will not accept responsiblity and is not willing or able to change their behaviour (and it's more than behavour, it's embedded thought patterns and emotional patterns) then eventually and far too laate, social services are out of options except adoption. But they are extremely unlikely to get consent

Lilka Fri 30-Nov-12 23:22:19

When the people you refer to know there is no chance of them having their children back of course they would agree to adoption

No they wouldn't. With all respect, that isn't how people's minds work, least of all very dysunctional people, sometimes with mental health problems

I have three adopted children, I've heard scores more stories from adoptive parents i know, I've read dozens of information reports on waiting children, I've other child protection experience and I know approximate statistics for relinquished children versus adopted without consent children

Next to no parents ever agree to adoption, no matter how abusive they are or how incapable. They don't do it. Why would they consent to losing their children?

In ROI, where consent is usually manadatory, there are nearly 0 adoptions of abused children. It's a near enough flat 0, except a couple (single digits) granted by high courts. There are more than nearly 0 children every year who are raped, beaten, starved, neglected and harmed irreperably by abusive families

morethanpotatoprints Fri 30-Nov-12 23:08:57

Lilka

When the people you refer to know there is no chance of them having their children back of course they would agree to adoption.
My sister wasn't adopted for 6 months because her natural mother was not of sound mind to sign the papers as this used to be a requirement. As it turned out when sound of mind she signed and I gained a sister I chose from hundreds of others. However, if consent wasn't required her mother could have wanted to keep her but not given the chance. My sisters mother had psychosis after childbirth.
Some people have no chance of being a suitable parent for various reasons but mistakes can not be made on a childs future.

funnychic Fri 30-Nov-12 22:42:50

I love a good debate and opposing views, all normally healthy debate but I find some of the post's on this thread inflammatory and possibly made with the sole intention of stirring things up???

Lilka Fri 30-Nov-12 22:11:04

And SS are not the judge and jury. There is an impartial judge in a court who decides on adoption. That is how our system works, all in courts. I don't have an issue with a judge taking on the role of 'jury' and making the decision

Lilka Fri 30-Nov-12 22:08:27

^If there is a chance that children are taken from their parents under false accusations, it seems fair to have a system where parents have to agree to their children being adopted.
Those clearly unable to keep their children would agree and those not willing should be given time to build a case and seek representation.
I don't think ss should be given this role of judge and jury themselves^

But parents who are clearly unable don't agree to adoption. Parents can be horrifically abusive to their children and still want them. That's why it's a bad idea to make parental agreement a requirement. Eg. It's not fair if Bob the Paedophile abuses his children and Bobbette his wife aids him and then they refuses to consent to adoption because they 'love' their children and want them at home with them to abuse more. This is about what's best for the children, not the parent. Every parent who does not agree has had time to work towards getting their child back, time to comply with requirements, attend contact visits, meet their representation and build a case if they have one. By the time we are talking final court hearings, they have sadly run out of chances, and now we need to work for the child, with or without their agreement

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 21:57:36

"Add message | Report | Message poster mysecretworld Fri 30-Nov-12 20:52:27
OMG

LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD MORE THAN HALF ARE ADOPTED WITHIN A YEAR THE OTHERS TAKE LONGER."

More than half of what? I'e given you the stats which show under 10% of children are removed from their parents. So where are you getting this more than half figure from? I ahve asked before and you have not responded. Please, please respond.

morethanpotatoprints Fri 30-Nov-12 21:24:08

If there is a chance that children are taken from their parents under false accusations, it seems fair to have a system where parents have to agree to their children being adopted.
Those clearly unable to keep their children would agree and those not willing should be given time to build a case and seek representation.
I don't think ss should be given this role of judge and jury themselves.

Maryz Fri 30-Nov-12 20:56:39

You really think that more than half of children taken into care are adopted within a year.

Really?

You do know you have your facts completely wrong.

mysecretworld Fri 30-Nov-12 20:52:27

OMG

LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD MORE THAN HALF ARE ADOPTED WITHIN A YEAR THE OTHERS TAKE LONGER.

STAND OUTSIDE A COURT WHICH DEALS WITH CARE CASES WITH A POLL AND ASK PEOPLE TO TICK BOXES ABOUT THEIR CHILDREN

IE ARE THEY IN FOSTER CARE

HOW LONG HAVE THEY BEEN IN FOSTER CARE

HAS YOUR CHILD BEEN ADOPTED
IF SO AT WHAT AGE

TELL YOU WHAT I WILL DO IT AND COPY AND PASTE IT ONTO HERE.

Maryz Fri 30-Nov-12 20:47:12

Oh, and I agree absolutely with Kewcumber's post above.

This is not a story about adoption, as only a small number of children removed from their parents are ultimately adopted.

Maryz Fri 30-Nov-12 20:46:22

mysecretworld only posts on threads like this. Her story may well be true, I don't know, but many of the posts are like reading chunks of Ian Joseph's innane site.

Maryz Fri 30-Nov-12 20:46:13

This is the fourth thread I have clicked on in the last three days about social workers removing children allegedly to place for adoption. All of them have been started by new or almost new posters (or namechangers).

In my opinion, the op's of those posts know very little about the whole business and are scaremongering. Or (and this is possible) they are deliberately setting out to upset people..

My main worry is that there are many women struggling to cope with their children, who may have PND or disabilities of some type, whose children may have extra needs, who may be suffering domestic abuse and who are sadly so fearful of having their children removed that they are avoiding going for help which they badly need, thus leaving their children very vulnerable sad.

mysecretworld Fri 30-Nov-12 17:59:36

the sw who dealt with my daughters case was if i may use this term a complete bitch. she was caught on video saying things to my daughter that she should not have done (which has been reported but nothing has been done yet)

at the contact centre we was at there was a girl there who was 18 her son was 12 months and he was put for adoption on her final visit the contact superviser told her it would be ok she could have another child in the future at the end of the contact the sw took the child from her while she was in tears when the foster carer took the child out she too was in tears and the girl ran out of the centre and lay down in the road at the gates to the centre and said if you take my child from me you may as well run over me and kill me.

the said girl is not pregant again and the sw has told her the child with be removed from her within hours of birth and will be adopted.

do you think that this is right ?

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 17:34:23

I'm guessing you don't let the facts get in the way of a damn good conspiracy theory though.

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 17:32:25

honestly honestly, find out more. Talk to a children's social worker. You will be amazed. I was.

FivesAndNorks Fri 30-Nov-12 17:27:43

I was also responsible, in my area, for the submission of these stats.
You'd think someone would have mentioned we were meant to fiddle them confused
You are completely, and utterly wrong

mysecretworld Fri 30-Nov-12 17:00:42

no the stats you found were the published ones.

do you really think they would be brave enough to put the true facts on the internet...............

mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm i dont think so.

like i said i know some parents who are fighting the system to get their children back but are fighting lies that have been put into court by so called expert witnesses

WHO I MAY ADD ARE NOW BEING TAKEN TO COURT FOR THERE ROLE IN THE WAY THEIR REPORTS WERE PUT INTO THE FAMILY COURTS

GOGGLE DR HIBBERT.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now