Sequential adoption leave

[wonderschmunder]

In theory, if you needed more adoption leave before your adoption leave had finished, how would your pay be calculated?

I have found this for pregnancy, which would be analogous www.maternityaction.org.uk/advice-2/mums-dads-scenarios/pregnancy-during-maternity-leave/ which appears to say pay is calculated on what you're on during leave. Has anyone any knowledge about this? Thank you.

[researchbookworm]

This is pure conjecture, but I assume it would vary with your employer. I don't know of a scenario that would involve you having a second child placed so soon after a first- I can't imagine that being approved by social services in the uk unless the children are related in some way. With back to back pregnancies the timescale means that the mother will def have some time back at work before her second baby is born. My employers require you to complete 3 months work prior to starting a new period of maternity leave- if this happens then your 2nd leave is treated exactly the same way as your 1st (unless your work hours have been changed in between). I would think that in your suggested scenario where there is no return to work in between then (my employer at least) would not give their full adoption pay package but that you'd still be entitled to statutory pay.
To be honest, my employers were a bit clueless about adoption leave generally (despite being a big company and having dealt with it a lot before). You may find that in this scenario talking to your employees early would lead to a better outcome than statutory throughout.

[wonderschmunder]

I can think of a scenario, or I wouldn't be asking!

If someone got preg very quickly after birth, it is possible they could end up in this situation with maternity leave. But so unusual. Even more unusual in an adoption context, I suppose.

If this situation happened (and the fact I have to closely ask about finances means I'm probably not the person for this), then I think timing re matching date etc would need to be very precise to maximise income. And that would be near impossible. Thanks.

[Themoleandcrew]

I was in this situation. My ddwas placed two weeks after I had returned to work. My job would not pay the enhanced adoption pay, would only pay statutory pay unless I had been back for 6 months. So my OH took adoption leave while I returned to work.

[bostonkremekrazy]

like maternity pay it does happen. usually its just the statutory adoption pay that is paid, rather than the additional workplace adoption pay the second - or third time around.

researchbookworm - on another forum in the uk there is a family who has just had their 3rd child placed within 12 months! siblings aged under 2 years. each child was placed separately.

[researchbookworm]

Wow- that's a surprise. I wouldn't have thought SWs would consider it such a short time after the 1st placement. Given how much they consider any existing birth children a 'risk' to the placement I'm amazed that was allowed to happen.

[researchbookworm]

Btw wonderschmunder- not meaning to imply you were making something up. Just surprised by the scenario (and as a result wondered if you were from somewhere like the USA in which case my reply would have been less helpful)
V impressed by all these people having such speedy second matches. It took us over a year just to get one!

[wonderschmunder]

If it's siblings, then keeping the siblings together is beneficial to the children.

And some birth parents don't give themselves any much space between pregnancies.

So, not so much a 'second match' (as in the adoptive parents thinking 'we love this parenting, lets have a second kid!') More of social services going 'this child may be BOGOF'. (I am being facetious with the BOGOF analogy, and hope it doesn't offend anyone, it's not meant.)

[wonderschmunder]

Sorry, researchbookworm, I try and not give too much detail on MN to preserve anonymity, but find that makes people very quick to make out the scenario isn't true, so I'm oversensitive. I often feel people want chapter and verse on every private matter before they believe what you're saying. No so much in adoption, as there is more of an appreciation of keeping things vague, for which I'm grateful!

Sorry to be oversensitive.

[researchbookworm]

No worries- it's always hard to gauge tone on chat forums. Totally with you on the anonymity thing :-)

[researchbookworm]

Ps if the timing is critical from a financial point then the SWs might be willing to work with you to achieve it. If I've understood the scenario correctly then their priority will be to make it work with you...

[wonderschmunder]

Possibly, in a slightly different scenario to this one, yes. But unfortunately, for this case, I don't think it'll work. I'm sure the LO(s) will find richer parents!

[Goingthroughnamechanges]

Finding richer parents would be social engineering, keeping siblings together would often be preferential to placement with different adopters. It may be if your work won't pay adoption leave you could request adoption support allowance, but it would depend on the situation and the local authority.

[MypocketsarelikeNarnia]

I think op means 'find richer parents' as in 'we can't afford to do this without mat pay' as opposed to 'let's steal blue eyed blonde boys from council estates and give them to the middle classes in their leafy Victorian piles'?

What a shame though op. Or maybe it just helps you answer a difficult question?

[Themoleandcrew]

Without wanting to out our family our third child was the second placement and we recieve an adoption allowance so they may be willing to offer a decent amount of money. We were offered a lot of money to take sibling 4 but it was impractical from a long term view. Not to mention unfair on our current children

[wonderschmunder]

In an ideal world there would be an adoption allowance that would allow me to say 'yes of course' to this situation. That would ensure no social engineering.

But essentially, I could ask for adoption allowance, but the way things are currently, they're much more likely to go for the family who are perfectly good, but don't require money, rather than our family who could be a perfect match. LAs just don't have the money to hand out.

SAP leave, and then paying for double the amount of childcare expected, just isn't an option.

[Themoleandcrew]

Obviously it's hard to say exactly due to privacy but it's very sad if you have to lose out because of money. Our current adoption allowance would not have been enough for me to survive on sap. Do you have a partner who could take leave? That's what we had to do which was hard as I wanted to stay home but needs must.

[cantthinkofannewname]

We adopted two birth siblings with a reasonable gap (I was back at work well over 6 months in between), but birth mum has subsequently had another baby who we were approached about (it all got more complicated after the baby was born but we'd already said no). Apart from having decided our children were better off as a two, the new baby was less than 11 months younger than our DC2. So we could potentially have been looking at a second placement before adoption leave ended with DC2 if they'd been placed at the same age.

Some families have a DC1 placed at say 2 but DC2 is about to be born or is already in foster care so they are 2 years apart but placed 9 months apart, say.

Based on my work's policy for maternity pay, I'd have had to be back for 6 months for enhanced pay but would get statutory pay immediately.

[cantthinkofannewname]

By the way, if we are talking a birth sibling, they are supposed to do everything they can to keep them together if appropriate, so they may consider helping you if this is the case.