Advanced search

Not wanting to meet birth family...

(14 Posts)
howmanyusernames Mon 06-Nov-17 15:10:02

I know this will be controversial, but it's more from a safeguarding point of view.
We are in Stage 2, and have been asked our views on meeting the birth family. Both of us would be happy to do so as we can see the benefits, but we are more concerned we could be 'found' if there was a safeguarding risk.
If the birth family wanted to find us we are very 'out there' on social media, and nationally (I won't say anymore), and if they knew our names they could very easily find where we work and potentially follow us home if they recognised our faces from that meeting.
Would it go against us at matching if we said no to meeting the birth family? Or if there was a safeguarding issue anyway we wouldn't be expected to meet them because of this?

OP’s posts: |
Jellycatspyjamas Mon 06-Nov-17 16:27:45

I found it easiest to say I'd be prepared to discuss it rather than say definitely yes or no. That way you keep your options open and if it becomes an issue you can discuss security nearer the time.

donquixotedelamancha Mon 06-Nov-17 17:24:14

Hi Victoria,

I think Jelly's advice is spot on- hedge for now. Raise the security concerns, but say you are in favour of it, in principle, but would need to discuss specifics. A child's SW should realise that you and David aren't suitable for a BP meeting in most cases.

I think since you are so 'out there' you need to think carefully about how this impacts your matching search- your concerns need discussing with SW during approval.

Ted27 Mon 06-Nov-17 19:15:22

I think keeping the option open would be most helpful to you at this point.

But a few things to consider, if the BPs were a very serious risk, it is unlikely that you would be offered a meeting. You may not be matched with a local child, few birth parents have the capacity and resources to physically track people down particularly if there is distance involved. My sons BD know where we live, in 6 years he has never turned up at my door.
You may have to reconsider what being 'out there' on social media means when you have a child, if there is a concern about identification.

Battleax Mon 06-Nov-17 19:59:21

Don are you having a funny turn?

StringandGlitter Mon 06-Nov-17 20:00:49

We met with birth family member. They only get your first name. They are not given your location (except our SW turned up to the meeting wearing her <city name> council pass and lanyard round her neck, which we managed to intercept before they saw).

It was really tough, but worth doing.

ChoccyJules Mon 06-Nov-17 20:04:41

We have actively toned down all our internet presence since DD was placed. Taken off our location, jobs etc from FB. Culled followers. Never mentioned adoption unless on an anonymous forum, not even in Messenger.

I suppose if you are well-known the fact that your faces may be recognisable is a concern.

howmanyusernames Tue 07-Nov-17 09:00:53

Thank you for the comments. I think we're going to say we'd be prepared to consider it, which we would, and as you say if there is a serious safeguarding issue we would probably not be expected to meet them anyway.
We have also not gone with our LA, and gone to one 45-60 mins away, so there will be that distance too.

P.S. We're not really V & D, I only wish we had their money! wink

OP’s posts: |
donquixotedelamancha Tue 07-Nov-17 19:24:04

@Battleax "Don are you having a funny turn?"
Did you not understand the reference, or do you think all posts should be absolutely serious in tone?

@OP "We have actively toned down all our internet presence since DD was placed."
I think this is quite an important point from Choccy. We also don't put the kids on t'interweb or post about adoption.

Battleax Tue 07-Nov-17 19:25:23

I couldn't work out why you'd plumped for the Beckhams.

donquixotedelamancha Tue 07-Nov-17 20:36:23

"I couldn't work out why you'd plumped for the Beckhams."

Aha, fair point. I honestly couldn't think of any other celebrities. This site is the extent of my engagement with social media so I couldn't come up with someone who might be trending on Twitbook.

Battleax Tue 07-Nov-17 20:50:23

The idea that they could lower their visibility by deleting some SM accounts is quite sweet smile

thomassmuggit Tue 07-Nov-17 21:22:05

I wouldn't raise this too early, I would 'keep an open mind' and see what security risk there is with a particular child/family. For example, if BM has moderate LD, can't travel on public transport alone, etc, and you live 100 miles away, the chances of her presenting any risk, even if she did recognise you in your specially chosen nondescript outfits, is very low.

We have tried to get SWs to sort out meeting BPs, and they still can't arrange it, despite us wanting it, BPs asking for it, etc. So bear in mind that SW being generally rubbish may mean it never happens anyway, if you're half hearted about chasing it, which you would be if you didn't want it.

Stating that you don't want to meet BPs early on could be a mark down, and you don't want that. 'We're open to it, and will discuss it when it's applicable' is suitably non-committal. Don't make issues.

hidinginthenightgarden Wed 08-Nov-17 20:15:02

If these meetings were to go ahead they will prepare you and discuss any concerns. You don't have to use names - especially surnames. You can refer to yourselves as "Sal and Jay" for example. They are not allowed to ask where you work and if you are really that concerned then delete anything too identifying from your account.
I do not have where I work on FB, any contact details any links to siblings etc and have the settings so that only friends and family can see anything.

Join the discussion

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

Join Mumsnet

Already have a Mumsnet account? Log in