I want my baby back - Panorama

[Hels20]

I hesitate to put this on the board but would be interested in the views of anyone who watches this - it's tonight on BBC 1 at 9pm.

I hope it gives a balanced account. Then there is the Channel 4 programme on Wednesday T 10pm on Finding a Mum and Dad.

Ah I see, you think it's legitimate to post children's details across t'internet. Is that right?

How do you know that all those birth parents who tell you they are innocent are telling the truth? Do you give them the automatic benefit of the doubt? Do you support them trying to tear apart adoptive families by exposing identities on social media?

If you do, then our discussion ends there because my daughter has gone through more than enough shit in her short life and there is nothing I won't do to protect her. I'm sure birth parents say the same. Feelings run high when your children are threatened. Which gives an extra responsibility to professionals and also to well-meaining volunteers and activists - like yourself - to keep a level head and stay focused on the paramount needs of the child.

Just so you know - I have a sister who is adopted - she was very rightly adopted by my parents. I am not blinkered on adoption. I just like things to be right.

One thing's for sure. I doubt social services will go near Jill McCartan after last night.

So you think maybe 50-100 cases a year are mistaken so we should stop 4000 adoptions a year?

How did you get to 50-100 a year?
Why do you think thats the right number?
If you think that adoption should happen in a minority of cases (lets for arguments sake say 50-100) and only 50-100 are dubious - what happens to the other 3500-3800 children? Do they get returned to birth parents or go into foster care for life like Ireland?

This Portugal thing gets chucked around a lot. Actually it's countries which don't have adoption without parental consent that are unusual. The vast majority of countries do do it, including Canada and the United states for a start

I do not give anyone automatic benefit of the doubt. My point is you cannot shut the box on social media or the internet in general. Neither I nor you or even the social networks themselves can stop it

still no ideas on what you say to parents who've been wronged?

Y'see, I don't know any adopted children where non-adoption would have been an option. Even if the social workers' reports were a pack of lies, there is usually some kind of objective evidence that we can see for ourselves. Like the state of older children left within the family, for example. Or broken bones/developmental delay caused by chronic neglect/fetal alcohol syndrome/a child telling you they were raped.

Of course, I only know a teeny proportion of adopted children. But I guess that's true of you, too. So maybe you should be a bit more careful in attempting to make guesstimates about how many forced adoptions are necessary. Because we don't really know, do we?

Anyone remember the case of Lianne Smith? Just saying

Still no evidence, wizardpc?

wizardpc, you say you have nothing to hide and have no problems with identities being revealed. So, to stop us all guessing, do tell us who you are and under what names you have posted on Mumsnet previously.

Why do I need to say anything to parents who have been wronged? Are you suggesting that the posters on here have a special responsibility?

As parents, we cannot imagine anything worse happening, short of a child dying. Doesn't that go without saying? Have we not been clear enough about how completely appalling it is to lose a child and how massively important it is to get these things right?

But I'm not getting your persistence with this. It's like going onto a forum for victims of crime and asking them what they would say to people who have been wrongfully imprisoned.

I didn't say I had a solution - I said I suspect that there is a high number of wrongful adoptions in a year - remember the CAFCAS guy said 1 was too many last night.

I think 50-100 (given that 1 is too many) would be absolutely grotesque. How many is OK then?

Im not asking 'you' or her slightly above. Im saying what do the authorities say and do to these parents?

Nobody here has said any number is ok.

Don't you think you're getting a bit goady?

Well, I've already said what I think. Why do you keep asking?

If you want to know what I think:

I think we should get it right 100% of the time and all efforts should be focused on improving the chances that we will be able to do that.

I think people who are not capable of parenting their children should not be able to prevent the hopes of that child to have a normal family ife. Indeed we would be breaking the Hague convention if we did so - I'm not sure how some countries get away will leaving children in care without making any attempt to place them in a family.

I think talk of compensating birth parents who have lost children is distasteful (If I were a birth parent I would be outraged by the idea) and I assume in the majority of cases would be almost impossible to prove definitively.

I agree - it should be correct 100% of the time.

There's a problem - it hasn't been to date.

I agree with a Kew

It's a tragedy when adoption has to happen

But it's the right thing in nearly all cases

We should of course be getting it right 100% of the time

When it goes wrong, there is no simple situation. It cannot just be fixed.

@MrsBW - you cant which is why you make adoptions reversible and pay compensation when you screw up

Nope - wrong answer.

That will drastically reduce the numbers of people willing to be adoptive parents, meaning vulnerable children - who desperately need a family environment after suffering abuse and/or neglect - will encounter further risk of trauma from multiple moves around placements or living in care homes.

Next idea?

Tell you what - if/when I adopt a child, what 'magic words' should I be looking for in their reports to help me decide if the birth parents abused their children or if this is a case where the medical experts have got it wrong.

Can you give me a 'how to' guide?

I think we should put our full weight behind:

1. Supporting families who need support to parent their birth children
2. Gaining all the evidence possible and interrogating that evidence thoroughly before making placement orders.

There are certainly cases where the above hasn’t happened – and this is a tragedy. This is why JH MP is a total failure and the people he fails most of all are the birth parents. He could affect some real change given his position and instead he advices birth families to run away.

Adoption though has to be absolutely final, for a great many reasons.

I don’t believe compensation is the answer – and I don’t believe many birth families would want to ‘get rich’ off losing their kids.

I said I suspect that there is a high number of wrongful adoptions in a year

OK so you really mean you have no idea and your statement of "thousands" over 24 years (which is where i got 50-100 from your figures 1000/24 to 2000/24) is just a fabrication.

1 is indeed too many, do you see anyone arguing with you?

But you are arguing that based on a fabricated figure of between 1-100 adoptions a year being mistaken that adoption should to all intents and purposes be stopped.

"Forced" adoption just means that the courts waive birth parent consent. It does not take into account whether the birth parents can be found, whether want the child back, whether they actively object, why they actively object.

It's a good post. However, (my figs may be wrong - less than 1% I think) are cases involving medical diagnoses re fractures etc.

The massive grey area is risk of future emotional harm.

Talking about compensation is distasteful, I agree. I can't believe this is the primary focus of any of the birth parents you work with.

Reversible adoption? No way. Remove my dd from the only mother she has ever known to hand her over to what are, to her, strangers? Are you serious?

Adoptions can be overturned in rare circumstances where legal procedures were not followed

I see absolutely no reason to extend the criteria by which they can be overturned. It will cause a lot of damage and instability. Abusive parents would be launching court cases while pretending to be innocent

Also, since when would overturning the adoption solve the problem? It's much more complex than that

wizardpc

Just out of curiosity, how do you draw a line between:

• abuse already happening
• nonexistent abuse

I am curious about the answer, from you.

Because every Hemming supporter is actually quite ignorant about that topic and they also want to act like psychological and emotional abuse don't exist or they are an unknown phenomenon.

Care to answer?

Ive always been a sucker for non-existent abuse - you'll have to give me a good link to that one!!

Maybe you can also adequately profile what emotional or psychological abuse is?