Just getting started

[dizzysteph]

My hubby and I are really just starting out in the adoption process. We have got past the initial assessment and are waiting to get a letter giving us dates for the training in the new year. We are alternately excited and a bit scared but sure that this is the right thing for us to do. We already have one daughter who is 4.

My husband is Chinese (Malaysian/Singapore)and Im white and we would obviously like to adopt a child with the same or a close racial mix to our daughter. I wondered if anyone has any experience of adopting mixed race Chinese children in this country. The sw who did our assessment (whilst very helpful) didnt know how often children with this racial mix get put up for adoption.

Any advice, thoughts, gratefully received! [hgrin]

Good luck dizzy. No advice I'm afraid, just positive vibes. We are a couple of years behind you, waiting for our dd to be 4 so we can start the process. :)

Hi dizzysteph. I have recently adopted a baby of mixed heritage; I also have a dd the same age as yours. In our case, our racial mix was highly represented - probably over-represented - in children up for adoption (white UK and black Caribbean). However, I have friends with a less common racial mix who have adopted. In their cases, they were warned that they may have to wait awhile, and I'm sure you'll find that mixed race Chinese children don't come up every day. However, when they do, you probably won't face much competition for them! Also, you may be considered for children who are seen as coming from a similar part of the world - so it is worth thinking through whether this is acceptable to you.

The key thing will be whether your adoption agency has the necessary skill and experience to handle this, or whether you might be better off with a more specialist voluntary agency (maybe talk to NCH Black Families Project?) You will almost certainly need to join the national adoption register, so you'll want an agency with a positive attitude to this. Make sure you talk family finding through with them at an early stage.

Very best of luck.

Another thing to think about is that the background of the child may be unknown, especially the birth mum was white and the birth father Chinese

Depending on the length and nature of their relationship, the birth mum may not know or may choose not to say about his exact ethnicity

Soemtimes the sw are just guessing and they are often very bad at it

So you mightbeofferd a child who looks a bit Chinese but actually they have no idea about exact heritage. Would this be acceptable to you?

Just re readthatand I don't think I explained very well

You could get a child who SS say is Chinese. This could be based on the birth mother saying yeah I think his parenstwerefrom china, when in fact they are korean, Thai or Vietnamese

It might matter a lot to you but it doesn't to ss so they won't make much effort to find out.they can present information as factual when its not, it's just their theory or belief

With all adoptions you will have to cope with a great deal of uncertainty

BTW I have two children who are euro Chinese and they both looked very European when they were born and more chinese as they got older

Just read Hester's post and a word of caution about going to a voluntary agency and NCH is mentioned - incidentally I think they have changed with name to "Action for Children" - they may well be better and quicker at assessing and approving adoptors who are not white European, but the fact remains that they can only then "sell" you to an agency that is looking for a home for a child of particular mixed heritage, as the vol agency of course does not have any children to place. So this may not hasten the process and you might still have a long wait. Also LAs are all cash strapped and will always plce with their own adoptors first and if not possible, will go to inter-agency placement, the last resort being a vol agency because of the high costs of such a placemement.

I have been retired from LA SSD for 6 years now though still work independently assessing foster carers and I'm a bit rusty about adoption, so don't know exactly how the adoption register works but presume it is to make appropriate matches wherever possible.

Kristina M - agree entirely with what you say abour soc workers who do not understand the importance of determining a child's racial and ethnic background. To some social workers black is black and there is a presumption that all black children are african/caribbean whereas that is often not the case.

Have you thought of overseas adoption, which I don't really approve of but just wondered if you had thought of this.

"which I don't really approve of" not sure there was any need to say that NN.

FSB ? Many thanks for the vibes, am needing them at the moment

Hester thanks for your comments that?s really helpful, I guess its confirmed just what we were thinking. We are with one of the bigger LAs so they should be up to speed with this.

A good point about the not knowing the exact heritage. I hadn?t thought of that one, so thanks for flagging it up. I?d better sit down with hubby and talk about that soon and get his opinion.

We had thought about abroad adoption but decided there are plenty of kids here who need homes so we ruled it out.

Kewcumber - I know you adopted from overseas and found your accounts of what happened etc and finally being matched with your little boy(?)really interesting. It's just that I have known a lot of o/seas adoptions go horribly wrong and then there is the business of celebs adopting children from o/seas and that doesn't seem right to me. Alos I know of prospective adoptors who have not been able to cope with the stress in the process of o/seas adoptions and the heartached that that brings.

Also I suppose I wonder about the birth mothers and whether they really do want to give up their babies - and have read accounts of how they are more or less forced into giving the child for adoption.

Sorry if you feel offended - my comment wasn't meant to cause offence but on reflection if is of course going to offend people in your position who have successfully adopted from o/seas.

not sure about the chinese mix,and also not sure you will get an exact match.we had to go on how both our daughters looked as there is no info on birth fathers. we were sent photos of children when we were adopting dd2,one of the children definately looked asian/white mix but bm insisted she was carribean mix.in the end she went wito a white father and thai mum.

nina - i was interetsed to read your opinion on overseas adoption. One thing i really don't approve of is people marrying soemone from another race. Its just i have known some mixed race marriages go badly wrong and it doesnt seem right to me. My friend didnt cope well with all the stress of divorce and another friend has been seriously depressed since her Dh left her. i know someone else who got married just to get a visa and citizenship in the country where she wanted to live.

i also wonder if in fact people are coerced into these marriages, i have read about it in the newspapers

its not that i'm bigoted or racist, its just i think everyobne shoudl marry soemone from teh same ethnic backgroud. because that way its bound to be ok, there will be no relationship breakdown and divorce.All white / black / Asian etc marriages have a 100% success rate

I must admit i have no evidence for my belief, i have never seen any figures which show that mixed race relationship have a higher breakdown rate, its just my personal opinion.

But then I'm guessing that you have no evidence either - that overseas adoptions are more stressful and have a higher disruption rate than domestic adoptions?

And England has a SHOCKING record of forcing birth parents to give up their children, far higher than in many similar countries.

People who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones

Kristina. Very clever. I was .

phew,thought you had a funny turn KM

KristinaM - I hadn't got you down as someone who was sarcastic, so was quite surprised by your "witty/clever" comments.

If your posts are an attempt to "show me" up in some way,then I will take your comments seriously. I can't give you exact figures but after 30 years in childrens services for a LA and independent practice, I can certainly remember many case of overseas adoptions that went horribly wrong.

I haven't made any comment about mixed race relationships so quite why you try to make a "clever" quip about that I'm not sure. In fact I'm not sure about either of your posts but there you go.

OK it is I admit an assumption that overseas adoptions are more stressful that UK ones by their very nature (and having read Kewcumbers posts about her experiences is just one story)

I made no comment about overseas adoptions having higher disruption rates than UK adoptions.

However I will take issue with you about Britain having a SHOCKING record of forcing birth parents to give up their children for adoption. This issue has come up time and again on MN but I am amazed that someone of your intellectual standing and insightful posts, believes in this nonsense.

At the risk of repeating myself (and I'm not really sure why I am bothering) because people who share your opinion aren't interested in facts,and just seem to take on board what birth parents whose children have been removed have said or the tabloids sensational inaccurate reporting.

Again I have to lean on my long career in childrens services to evidence that I have been involved in hundreds of cases where children have been removed from their parents and later placed for adoption, and I have never seen a case where this was not the right decision. The first duty for social workers has always been to try to keep families together, and do everything in their power to offer support (though because of the huge rise in caseloads and because sws have to spend 70% of their time in front of computer screens thanks to Lord Laming, then preventative work has fallen by the wayside in many cases.

However it is still the case that if a sw is going to court for a Care Order, or Parenting Order, then comprehensive assessments have to be made, and anything that is written in support of the LAs application has to be evidenced in court. Decisions to bring cases to court are made at multi disciplinary case conferences. A child's guardian is then appointed who is quite independent from the SSD and is a social worker from CAFCASS. If they disagree with the sws actions they have no hesitation in saying so (which is how it should be) and they are very influential in family proceedings courts. Then there is almost always a psychologists report, possible psychiatrists if mental health issues are involved. Anyone who makes a statement in the proceedings is subject to intensive cross examination (again this is fair enough)

Birth parents are represented by their own lawyers and defence lawyers fight very hard in court for their clients, eventhough they don't really understand the issues of "good enough parenting" (I have been cross examined for 3 to 4 hours at a time) At the final hearing the judge has all the paper work (known as the court bundle) and these cases take 4 or 5 days of court time. If any sw makes a statement that cannot be evidenced they will be given short shrift by the judge (quite rightly). At the end of all this, it is for the judge to make the final decision.

If very young children cannot be cared for safely by their parents, then they deserve the permanence and stability that adoption will bring. They only have one childhood - they don't have time to wait for their parents to overcome their drink/drug problems etc.

I do NOT condemn birth parents and havebeen pilloried on MN for daring to take issue with an adoptor who referred to the birth parents as "pond life" ---- in my experience birth parents have almost always had poor parenting themselves, experiencing neglect and abuse and sadly do not have the emotional stability and maturity to parent.

I can tell you Kristina that I have seen many cases where care proceedings should have been brought years before they aactually were, and then those children are too damaged to have any chance of a half decent life.

I have also been commissioned by the courts in dozens of cases as an independent assessor (where LAs are in proceedings) and when I was an independent sw and the lawyer for the parent has requested an independent assessment which has been agreed by the court.

I have very occasionally been of the view that the birth parent has not been given every chance, usually because they haven't been offered the opportunit for a residential assessment and have said in my reports that this should be offered. However in the vast majority of cases I have agreed with the LA and often made the point to the judge, that these proceeding should have been brought earlier.

I don't suppose anyone who believes in this nonsense of "forced adoption" is still reading.

OK Kristina - please tell me where your evidence comes from about "forced adoptions"
and I find it hard to believe that you are the same person who posts such rational, helpful, perceptive posts on MN.

Dizzystep - I do apologise for the fact that this thread has gone off on a tangent, which will not be helpful to you, but I just have to respond to these people who believe that children are just removed for no good reason and the matter is rubber stamped by the courts, when this is not the case. However I suppose I started this "debate" by mentioning overseas adoption.

Hope things go well for you whichever way you decide to go.........

Nina - you have missed my point entirely

I know you did not mention "mixed marriages". I was trying to show (by an analogy) that its nonsense to say that you don't approve of overseas adoption (but you DO approve of domestic adoption) because its:

Stressful

Sometimes disrupts and

You have read in negative things about it in the tabloids i.e. that birth mothers are forced to give up their children

ALL of the above things are true of domestic adoption as well!!!!!!!

It would only be relevant if you could show that these problems are more frequent in overseas than in domestic adoption. Which you cant. The plural of anecdote is not data

Your long tirade about the English legal process simply makes my point for me! You are allowed to believe everything you read, I am not!!

Nevertheless, I entirely stand by my comment that England has a much higher rate of forced adoptions than in other similar countries and I note that you have not addressed that point in any way.

I am also struck my your certainty that you have NEVER seen a case where a child has been removed incorrectly. I have to say that I have never known any lawyer, doctor or other social worker make such a claim.

I also find it interesting that you believe my comments are " an attempt to show you up". You obviously perceive that I am attacking your as a person, rather than taking a different view Do you always react this strongly to someone who disagrees with you? Why is it not ok for others to take a different view?

I would also ask you to consider why you are resorting to personal attacks and name calling rather than engaging in debate.

And finally, Nina, to say that " I just have to respond to these people who believe that children are just removed for no good reason and the matter is rubber stamped by the courts" is simply a straw man arguement. No one on this thread has said any such thing. Except you.

" I suppose I wonder about the birth mothers and whether they really do want to give up their babies - and have read accounts of how they are more or less forced into giving the child for adoption."

Well I'm more confused than I was before Kristina. I am clearly not following your "analogies" - incidentally I did not say I had read anything in the tabloids as I don't read them.

When I made my original comment about overseas adoption, I was not trying to claim that they were more stressful, had higher breakdown rates than UK adoptions. I was simply posting about some experiences that I knew of, and yes I could have added that the stress of UK adoption is also very high, but I was simply sounding a note of caution.

Of course I can't show the difference in the breakdown rates of overseas adoptions and UK adoptions and it had never been my intention to compare and contrast the two routes to adoption. It was you that decided that this was what I was trying to do.

My long tirade about the english legal system, you say allows me to believe everything you read, whilst you are not. I am not arriving at my viewpoint because of what I have read, I am talking about 30 years experience in being involved in care proceedings, both as a LA soc wrkr and as an independent sw.

I note that you "stand by your comment" that England has far more "forced" adoptions than in other countries and that I haven't addressed this. How canyou evidence this. You have already told me (quite rightly) that I can't (and never intended to) comment on this, as it is not possible, so I would be interested to knowwhat encourages your to "stand by your comment" in this respect.

I haven't ever been involved in a case where in the LA that I worked for 23 years, where a Care Order application was not granted and I conclude from that, given all the comprehensive reports etc etc that the child has not been removed without good reason. This does not mean of course that there have been cases in other LAs where children have been wrongfully removed from their parents, and the Cleveland and Orkney cases come to mind, and those where fabricated illness has been used in care proceedings.

I also made the point that as an independent assessor there have been cases where I have recommended further assessment of birth parents, and what has happened (although I didn't think to say this) is on one occasion the judge over-ruled my recommendation that the birth parents should have the opportunity of a residential assessment. In other cases the judge has agreed with my recommendation that birth parents should be given more support to enable them to care for their child.

Of course I don't object to others having a different view but I think the confusing way you attempted to demonstrate your opposition left me feeling very confused. I would add here that I do get frustrated by people criticising child protection procedures and complex cases involving the family proceedings court and sometimes the high court, when they have never had anything to do with these complicated matters. I would not dream of criticising teachers, lawyers, doctors, nurses, psychologists, medics, accountants, and others in non professional jobs, because I would not have had their experience and whilst I might ask questions and seek clarification, I would never feel in a position to criticise as so many on MN do about social workers, and child protection matters, "forced" adoptions etc.

You accuse me of resorting to personal attacks and name calling?? I don't think this has been the case - in fact I have been complimentary to you about the perceptive and helpful posts that I have read of yours in the past. Why do you think my posts are not an endeavour to have a debate?

I accept that no one on this thread has said that "children are just removed for no good reason and the matter is rubber stamped by courts" but on other threads there have been numerous posters and one Lib Dem MP who have put forward that view time and time again. Many social workers and lawyers have tried to dissaude them from that view, but in the end most give up as it is simply a waste of time and energy because people have more invested in believing this than listening to people who are actually involved in these matters.

I know from other posts that you are an adoptive parent, and may for all I know have adopted from overseas, and this has all struck a nerve with you, (or not) but I can assure you there was nothing in my mind to start some contentious matter on this thread.

I will end with the old chestnut that social workers are "damned if they do, and damned if they don't" and I'm sure you are aware that applications for careproceedings have increased quite dramatically since Baby Peter, and who can blame social workers for not wanting to take any risks and be pilloried by the Sun and their ilk.

How many other doctors, lawyers, social workers have you discussed this matter with

I didn't think Kristina's analogy was difficult to follow at all - was quite simple in fact. You stated a few things that many of us don't recognise and in fact they are you view based on presumably a small number of ICA cases/ Kristina was just using an analogy to demonstrate how foolish trying to extrapolate small a few personal experiences can be.

Whats to misunderstand?!

In my experience (probably greater than your but happy to be corrected) ICA is no more stressful than domestic (the stresses are different but I think no different on average), Uk has an exemplary record in not dealing with countries where there is any suspicion that children are being taken from birth family unwillingly, ICA has a lower disruption rate than domestic (according to the sw's on my prep course but am also happy to correct their assertions if you can point me in teh right direction).

"I was simply sounding a note of caution" - no you weren't, you very clearly said "I don't approve"

"the business of celebs adopting children from o/seas" - which celebs do you know in the UK who adopted? Just wondering because I know a couple and they are very low profile about it and would be very distressed to think their adoptions were being used as a reason to diapprove of ICA. I assume you're not referring to US adopters because the system is so different there that to compare any kind of adoption from US vs UK is pointless. You don't mean that celebs shouldnt be allowed to adopt from a country other than their own generally do you?

I'll explain to the prospective adopters I know who gave up because their (UK) sw decided half way through the home study that the husband was a closet homosexual and wouldn't recommend approval (not because he was gay but because he wouldn't admit it), they considered appealing but she decided she couldn't put her DH of 20 years through it that Uk adoptions are less stressful. Or the couple who have had custody of their "chidlren" for over two years who have beenpleading for help with the older child more or less since he was placed with them only after issuing a formal complaint has he been properly assessed, diagnised with (amongst itehr things) RAD and taken back inot care for the safety of the younger child and during the court appointed assessment a whole load of information came out that the family had not previously been told, I'll tell them that ICA has more "traumatic ends" than domestic.

Of course thats only my personal experience - funnily enough I don't draw any general points about UK adoption from them.

The fact that you drag in commetns made about removing children inapropriately on a thread where no-one else has commented on this and with people who have never in my recollection ever taken that stance, shows me that however well intentioned your posts, that you struggle to make appropriate comments to the appropriate people and I think you need to think more carefully about who your "audience" is.

For anyone who is interested in international comparators in adoption issues, here is a Report to Adoption Law Review Group of Scottish Executive.

It notes that

"In England in March 2003 a majority of looked after children (65%) were subject to care orders and a further 1,900 were "freed for adoption" - a higher figure than in most of the other countries we have reviewed"

"In Denmark and Sweden only 3% of care orders are made without parental agreement, compared to 30% in the UK (Selwyn & Sturgess 2001 p 43)."

"The 2002 Adoption & Children Act makes the child's welfare the paramount consideration in any decision relating to adoption. This will make it easier to place children for adoption against the wishes of their birth parents, even if there is no specific fault, an approach unacceptable to many of the other countries reviewed and which raises concern over the lack of support for birth
mothers who lose their children in this way (Mason & Selman 1997)."

Kewcumber - I am aware that we have clashed (for want of a better word) on threads before but I did actually apologise to you earlier on this thread if you found my comment above overseas adoption or ICO offensive. All adoptions in my mind are to a greater or lesser extent stressful. I was not attempting to compare and contrast the differences between ICOS and UK adoptions, though I accept that I said I did not approve, and on reflection this was a little strong and I meant to sound a word of caution but can see how it came across. I actually read your accounts of your ICO adoption and was mightily impressed with the process and can understand that you would be offended by someone saying they didn't approve of something. However this is what life is like isn't it - we can't all approve of the same thing and yes we "fight our corner" but that is the essence of healthy debate in my view.

I think your attempts to comment on my misunderstanding of Kristina's post, say more about you than they do about me.

You made a comment that insecure attachments are nothing like RAD and I asked if you would explain what you meant, but no explanation was forthcoming. Anyway your comment demonstrated very clearly to me that you have little understanding of attachment issues/disorders.

You also accuse of me "dragging in comments about children being removed inappropriately on a thread where no one else has mentioned it" - if you look at Kristina's post on this thread of 28th Oct you will see that she states: "England has a SHOCKING record of forcing parents to give up their children - far higher than any other country."

I therefore find the final para on your post as both inaccurate and patronising. Interestingly Kristina has commented on another thread today to say that "overseas adoption is hard and expensive"

Anyway you and I are never going to see eye to eye and therefore I will attempt wherever possible to try to enter into any debate with you, which will probably be better for both of us.

Kristina - I note that you have chosen to end our "debate" and I think that is probably a wise decision and was going to suggest that we will just have to agree to disagree.

However I don't think the figures that you quote from the Report to the Adoption Law Group, about the numbers of children "freed for adoption" being higher than in most of the other countries reviewed" proves your point at all. There are many variables: maybe child protection is managed more efficiently in the UK (except of course when tragedies happen to children who should have been removed before they were killed by their parents/step parents, and the ensuing hue and cry from the tabloid readers and politicians.

There is also the issue of planning for permanency. If a Judge on hearing all the evidence and listened to the extensive cross examination decided to make a Parenting Order (which used to be called Freeing for Adoption) then in my view there is a duty to ensure that the child has the permanence and stability that every child deserves and is afforded by adoption.

I was not suurprised at all to see the vast differences between the Scandinavian countries and the UK. This is because those countries have far far superior and worthwhile social policies than the UK (and most other EU countries) in relation to all aspects of child care and this is clearly going to be reflected in the figues you have quoted. The report therefore in my view is not comparing like with like.

I have no idea about the work of Mason & Smellman 1997 that you quote to support your argument. It strikes me that they are arguing against the child's welfare being the paramount consideration, and are more concerned about the rights of the parents than the child. Whatever work this was was 13 years ago, and there would be many who disagree with this. Martin Narey the chief executive of Barnardoes for a start, who believes that too few children are removed from parents who are unable to keep them safe, or not removed soon enough, which means they are very disturbed, making placement more difficult and subjecting a child to emotional distress and its manifestations throughout the life span.

There has been a lot of talk on these threads and elsewhere about the Family Proceedings Courts and High Courts dealing with applications for Care Orders/Pareninting Order being open to the public and I have always been opposed to that because it exposes the child at the heart of these proceedings to all and sundry having information that should in my mind be confidential and that is true for the birth parents too. The only reason I think it might be a good thing, is to demonstrate to people who hold the same view as you (and there are many on MN including a liberal MP in the midlands)just how much time and consideration and cross examination goes on in these cases. At the end of the 4/5/6 days set aside for these matters it is the judge that makes the final decision, and in my experience judges are very very astute at getting to the heart of the matter and making their decision based on all the reports (known as the court bundle) and listening to all the evidence presented and of course the lengthy cross examinations.

It does really puzzle me how it is that people who have nothing to do with these complex matters and have never met a parent who abuses/neglects their child, or even seen such a child, and have maybe never been inside a court, can hold such views about "forced adoption" - I have to say that to me it seems somewhat arrogant. To use an analogy it would be like me going into a hospital theatre and telling the surgeons that they were not conducting the operation
in a satisfactory manner.

I would really like to know how people who think as you do feel about the cases where children have been fatally injured by their parents, or starved, sexually abused etc etc - do you think then that the child should have been removed before this tragedy and if you do, how that fits withyour beliefs about "forced adoptions"

Dizzysteph - you must be even more dizzy now! Once again I apologise that I inadvertently sent this thread astray by mentioning overseas adoption or inter-country adoption. I admit to saying I disapproved, which was a bit strong really, and I was I suppose thinking aloud and even though I apologised to one MN who I know has adopted from another country, it has still brought forth the posts from others that I suspect have also adopted from overseas that you may or may not have seen. It was not my intention to divert the thread but I should have known that this happens on MN as we all try to defend our position.

Maybe you have found the posts interesting but I suspect they may have made you more confused, and if this is the case for my part I apologise.

i think its you NN whos caused the confusion.

Oh I remember you hifi from other threads and saw a post from you earlier on and wondered how long it would take you to come and have another "pop" at me and I didn't have to wait long! I am amazed at the way MN posters bear grudges. Have a nice day!

you credit me with a better memory than I have NN - I dont recall any particular "clash" with you though I do find your views slightly lecturing and I tend to avoid responding to them where I can. My original comment was simply ""which I don't really approve of" not sure there was any need to say that NN. ie this wasn't a discussion about ICA and even of you felt the need to raise it with OP which you are perfectly entitled to do I couldn't see what relevance your disapproval had. I really don't take offence at whetehr you approve or disapprove or take a neitral position. I have dealt with worse both on MN and in RL and people are perfectly entitled to thier opinions. There was no need to apologise for it.

It was your subsequent post implying that childrne outside the UK are being taken unwillingly from their parents, that there is somehow is a celeb culture in the Uk of ICA which is somehow distasteful to you and that it is in some way a more stressful process that led to my subsequent posts as it moved way past the point of "opinion" and into the realms of misinformation. That I do take issue with and given that you hold yourself out as being a seasoned professional with many many years of experience, I think you have a duty of care to correctly represent the situation not extrapolate from a few experiences which you haven't been specific about across the whole range of ICA.

"I think your attempts to comment on my misunderstanding of Kristina's post, say more about you than they do about me." - I have no idea what you mean by that - I think they say that I understood them and you didn't.

Re insecure attachment and RAD - I didn't comment because it wasn't on this thread and may have mightily confused everyone and was unwillingly to keep the debate going on the other thread and upset some posters I am (cyberly) very fond of just to have my say. But if you insist - I understand that an "insecure attachment" is not at all the same thing as RAD or plain AD if you prefer (though I know pyschologists in the uK who do use RAD as a diagnosis). It is perfectly feasible for a child to be insecurely attached without having RAD, in fact wouldn;t you say that all adopted children are initially insecurely attached? Surely you would? DS was certainly insecurely attached for some time but no-one in their right mid would consider him to have AD (R or otherwise). Describing AD as brain damage is often used to explain to parents the permanent damage caused by neglect, lack of bonding etc and depending on the degree and age such "damage" may never be reversed but may only be mitigated. I'm surprised to hear a professional in the field not understand the distinction as Ithought I was quite common to talk about both issues quite separately.

I'm sure my friend whose son has a diagnosis of severe AD (currently uncertain whether it is R or some other type with complex ADHD) would love to think that his problem was "insecure attachment" - it's not insecure, it's non-existant and currently because of his RAD he is really incapable of attaching.

Hifi is stalking you?! She always seemed so nice and reasonable to me!