Deflated about first letterbox

[PurpleMac]

DS moved in in January, at just over a year old. We met his BM in February and it was a really lovely meeting. We really connected and she was a very sweet young woman who just wanted what's best for DS, but who would not have been able to cope with a child. I should add that he was removed at birth and she had her final contact with him last Autumn.

We sent our first letterbox last month and today CAFIS called me about it. Said BM had received the letter a couple of weeks ago and is working on her response, and really liked the letter and appreciated that we sent photos.

However, for very obvious safeguarding reasons, we only sent photos of DS where he could not he identified - so mostly from the side or behind, but showing him having fun and doing nice things (not rubbing it in, BM had asked for this!). The CAFIS worker asked me "is there any particular reason that you decided not to share photos where she could actually see his face??".

I feel fucking horrible. I went to such a great effort to write what I thought was a really lovely letter and have been filtering photos into a separate album on my phone regularly so they can be included. When he is doing something particularly lovely I always take a non-identifiable photo so it can be included. All in all I sent approximately 75 photos FFS which I thought was above and beyond, and now the CAFIS worker has made me feel like absolute shit for not sending photos of his face. Her reasoning was that it's such a recent adoption that BM knows what DS looks like anyway. My feelings (fully supported by SW) are that he has changed considerably since she last saw him and actually she might not recognise him in a crowd anyway.

I know BM is probably a bit upset about this but this was what we agreed when we met and she was ok with this decision, and from what she has posted on her Social Media (yes I know I shouldn't look but I did) she was delighted to have received so many photos. So actually I do feel that this is mostly coming from the CAFIS worker, I feel judged for not showing his face.

Sorry I just needed a rant. I tried so hard to get this right for BM and now feel like I've fucked it up anyway.

[Jessica78]

I think you've been brilliant. Hold fast to what was promised, you haven't done anything wrong!

[Cleaningthefours]

BM doesn't think you fucked it up. That's what is important. Try not to look at her social media though, it's not very fair.

[rollingonariver]

You've done great, you've taken into account everyone's feelings and safety. Honestly don't worry about her response, people say shit things and everyone around you (including BM) thinks you've done the right thing!

[donquixotedelamancha]

Her reasoning was that it's such a recent adoption that BM knows what DS looks like anyway.

Her reasoning isn't relevant and shouldn't be shared with you in that way. You have a letterbox agreement, which has been carefully thought out to fit the circumstances of your adoption and look after the best interests of your child.

You (very admirably) share photos, which is more then most adopters, because your child's BM is very low risk. You don't share identifying photos because there is always some chance of social media contact in teens and this is to be avoided. If identifying photos were appropriate, then that is what would be in the agreement.

As it happens, her reasoning is idiotic- kids change enormously at that age and he will look very different after 7-8 months. If you took her 'advice' then what happens next year? 'Well she knew what he looked like last year'.

You would be within your rights to make a complaint, but I think that would be overkill. Personally, I would ask the child's SW to speak to her and stress the following:

• It is the SW and the child's parents who work out letter box arrangements. It's not the place of a letterbox administrator to try to change these.
  

• The letterbox coordinator needs to know what is in that letterbox agreement, because her job is to make sure the protocols for your specific case are followed.
  

• Adopting is a fraught process. Blundering into a situation can cause upset, which can be avoided by thoughtful handling. In this case a chat with the SW first would have clarified the situation for her- and I think it is reasonable to point out that you were upset.
  

I would insist on a clear response because you want to make sure that contact is nailed down for the future. On a positive note, if this is the worst blunder you've had in the process you've got a good SW and a good agency- so it should be easy to sort.

[PurpleMac]

Thanks all. Really trying our best to do our best by BM.

Don you are completely right. The person I spoke to is BMs support worker provided by the service so therefore has obviously developed a relationship with her, but she still had no right to ask what she asked. At the meeting when BM asked for photos our SW was very reluctant, but I said I was happy to consider it but that it would only be non-identifying photos. On the agreement though it does just say photos so maybe it's just crossed wires.

By chance I am seeing DSs old SW on Friday as she is popping round for a brew and to countersign his passport application, so I may mention it to her then.

You are right though, this has been the worst blunder we've had because we've had an incredibly easy time throughout the whole process. I realise how lucky we are for that to be the case!

[Ted27]

To be honest, my first thought was why on earth send 75 photos. You have set massive expectations here. Do you think you will be able to keep that up, when you are back at work, when your son is at school?

I appreciate that its very new and you feel there is a connection with birth mum, but I think you are setting yourself up for difficulties as you have effectively provided a photo diary of your childs life for a vulnerable young woman. Is she likely to expect this every year.

Having said that you are right to send non indentifying photos and the SW is being a twit.

But think very carefully how many you send next time

[OurMiracle1106]

I’m a BM and I’m over joyed to get 1/2 pics a year.

However I do think you shouldn’t look at her social media.

Im actually wondering why full names of birth parents even NEED to be shared? Surely they could be kept on file for when the child wanted to trace them?

My local authority is aware I have moved locally but not where to as I haven’t disclosed my new address as I don’t feel it’s necessary or of benefit to my birth son.

[PurpleMac]

I agree about SM and how unfair it is. I actually came off SM a few months back but was getting twitchy and caved and checked it last week. I've now permanently deleted it (rather than just de-activate) so won't be doing it again. It's no good for my mental health either.

Ted to be honest it takes me 5 minutes a month to have a sift through my photos to find appropriate ones to send, and then costs about a fiver to get them printed. I won't be sending that many every year but plan to slow it down gradually - maybe 50 next year, 40 the next etc. It's not been a huge effort and I do think it's the least I can do for her.

I've thought very hard about setting expectations which is why I decided that we would not send cards (birthday, Christmas etc) because of no was to ever stop doing it, it would be devastating. But I really have no issues at all with the photos. I scrapbook a lot anyway so am always filing things into different folders and ordering prints.

[donquixotedelamancha]

The person I spoke to is BMs support worker provided by the service so therefore has obviously developed a relationship with her

Ah, that makes more sense, though also more inappropriate for her to ask that. Part of her role needs to be supporting letterbox. I really would do more than mention it. I would ask for a specific resolution from your child's current SW. That's not going to make problems for her, but it makes sure everyone is singing from the same hymn sheet.

To be honest, my first thought was why on earth send 75 photos. You have set massive expectations here.

I did think that. Non-identifying photos are going to be harder when the child is older, so that number might be hard to maintain, but that's an issue for another day- OP is clearly working hard to do the right thing. All the more reason to be hard-headed about boundaries, so that contact is sustained.

However I do think you shouldn’t look at her social media.

Honestly, if I were sharing that much, I think I would be tempted to keep an eye on what mum is posting publicly. I'm not saying it's right, but I understand the desire to make sure those photos of your child are being used in the right way.

Im actually wondering why full names of birth parents even NEED to be shared?

My immediate thought was to agree, because you highlight an important issue, but having thought about it I'm not sure it would work for two reasons:

1. Parents are the ones who will manage future contact and life story work, even over 18. That info is the child's and as such their parents have responsibility over it.
   
2. A lot of info needs to be passed on for the child's history. If BF have SM profiles which aren't locked down I suspect that omitting surnames might not do much to prevent searches. If SM is locked down there is nothing to find.
   

I do think adopters should be respectful of BP's privacy, but ultimately there can be no laws restricting looking at public posts.

[OurMiracle1106]

But why do adopters need this information? What benefit does it have to the child to know full names of birth parents? Surely first names only would be better? It would minimise risk of an adopted child tracing their birth parents without the support which all parties will need and would allow privacy.

[PurpleMac]

OurMiracle adopters are given the original birth certificates when the child is placed as they are often needed for admin purposes (I.e. registering at the GP, enrolling in school if they are older). The adopters also know their child's surname so that gives away at least one of the birth parents surnames.

I really appreciate that there is a power imbalance in that adopters know a LOT about birth parents who in return know nothing about them, but this is because it's all in the best interest of the child.

[Firstnameterms]

Let’s not turn this into a Facebook debate. There have been many threads where people have shared views on this subject. Anybody can check anybody’s social media. There are privacy settings
, but you know that.

I’m a bit stunned that the letterbox team could have anything negative to say about 75 photos being sent! Although surely that just made it more obvious that you were deliberately choosing non identifiable ones? 3 photos could be overlooked but 75 photos where you can’t see a face may have been a little much. It doesn’t matter though because Bm was happy and you are happy. Don’t take in anything they said to you. You don’t have to do any of this and they know that! Most adopters don’t even send photos which is why I’m shocked they would find fault with 75 pictures! The first letterbox is the most emotional, especially if you have met them. It fades over the years and you may find you don’t want to send so many pictures as your life becomes normal and moves on.

[OurMiracle1106]

then I suppose my question is how do I ensure they cannot trace me via databases and electoral rolls?

My facebook is locked down and unless you have a mutual friend you can’t even find my profile so that’s safe. All tags I have to ok first as well.

[PurpleMac]

OurMiracle unfortunately I suppose that's just the world we live in now - it's almost impossible to go completely off the grid, anyone can track anyone down if they have a name and try hard enough.

I'm not saying that's the way it should be. It's shit. I feel a lot of guilt about how much I know about BM whereas she doesn't even know the correct spelling of my name.

I know that DH and I have discussed that we will not tell our DS his birth surname until he is old enough to decide for himself what to do with that information.

[Firstnameterms]

You can take yourself off the published electoral roll. I am. Who exactly do you think is going to be tracking you down via a database? Your child? Type your name into google. That’s what your birth child would do if they wanted to search in their teens. Then type your name into social media searches. That’s it, with the average teen, that’s pretty much what they will do. I have a nickname on social media and no profile picture.

[Ted27]

ourmiracle, I know dozens of adopters, some not all, look at BPs facebook pages. I've never heard of anyone trying to trace through databases and electoral rolls.

I do look at my son's birth mums FB page, I'm not interested in stalking her, or the details of her life, I simply want to know that she is still alive, because her lifestyles choices aren't compatible with a long life. My biggest fear is her death. But to be honest, I have neither time, energy or inclination to search beyond FB. I look very occasionally, I'm not there every day checking up on her, thats not why I look.
Don't forgot also that many children are adopted at an age when they are well aware of their own names. My son was nearly 8 at placement, theres a lot he knows I'd rather he didn't, including names and addresses.

[Firstnameterms]

PurpleMac-the reason you know so much about birth mum is because something happened to make it so she could not keep her child safe/secure. In order for anybody to adopt a child they have to weigh up risk. With that comes the family history etc. So don’t feel shit about it. Many birth parents cannot let go and can be dangerous. There are bloody good reasons why birth parents are not privy to your information. So don’t sit feeling guilty about a system that is the way it is because of the people and circumstances it deals with.

Even birth parents who are not dangerous could one day decide they can no longer hold back from finding their child (natural really). So it protects not just you but the child.

Gah, I said let’s not turn this into a privacy debate and hear I am talking about it!

[PurpleMac]

Firstname you are right, I guess it's just because she's already so vulnerable and the imbalance makes her even more vulnerable. I kinda want to wrap her in cotton wool and adopt her too (even if she is only 4 years younger than me!).

[Ted27]

I think its great when circumstances enable you to me sympathetic to the birth parents, I've a lot of sympathy for ours.
But to be honest it sounds like you need to take a step back, however much you empathise, she isnt your responsibilty. Your responsibilty is to your child.
I don't mean that you should never consider her feelings, but you can't get too involved with them either. Can I just say that I do speak from experience. My son was much older at adoption so there was more contact. Unfortunately dad did start to push the boundaries and it was very difficult to manage.
It will get more difficult to take non-identifying photos and you really dont want her to start seeing you as some kind of friend. I would also be concerned about her putting photos on social media

[UnderTheNameOfSanders]

We send 4 photos with every contact. The letters are one page of A4 every time. Everyone knows what to expect.

We send clear full face photos but don't have the DCs on Social media.

[Metoodear]

PurpleMac

Thanks all. Really trying our best to do our best by BM.this is we’re your going wrong I am afraid the only person who matters in all this is lo that is all it’s not our job to appease or make fell better their will be nothing we can ever do ever to ease the pain of loosing a child it matters not wether she thinks your doing a good job or not just los view when older