Why do you want to adopt?

[JustAnotherYellowBelly]

I am currently getting all my ducks in a row (paying off debts, moving to a better(?) area etc) so that I will be in a good position to adopt either an older child or sibling group. I'm also waiting until I'm a few years older so that I feel I will be taken more seriously (am mid-twenties).

The only problem I am having is, how do I answer that question?!
I have my reasons:

• I feel I can give a child with a more difficult background a good quality of life because I can think outside of the box
• there are so many children needing the patience and time I will be able to give

Plus many more that I can't seem to put into words... What were your reasons and how do you articulate them?!

Thank you for all your responses, bit busy this evening but will reply soon!

I could understand if the am's depression was brought on by a non-related event eg close family member died, lost her job or even non-specific or even mild depression associated with adoption as a result of being tired and caring for a new born, change in lifestyle etc but to my mind the fact that she suffered serious depression as a result of her decision to adopt so much she required ect and in-patient psychiatric care no I don't agree that she should have been allowed to keep the baby and adopt another. The babies she adopted came from middle class genetic backgrounds. One went on to develop serious mental illness. The other is serving life for murdering them all.

Had this coversation with husband few months ago. He was trying to question me like a sw might. Good to see that my and his replies were pretty much what people said here. Hoping to adopt in september.

Do you think women with PND should automatically have their children taken away, and never be allowed any more? No? Then why should that be true of a woman with post-adoption depression?

Note: I know very little about the Bamber case and am not commenting on it.

I could maybe go with that if the depression was caused by an unrelated matter or even if it was related directly to adopting the child if it was mild. To suffer serious depression as a direct result of the decision to adopt requiring ECT and in-patient psychiatric care sounds alarm bells for me. The new born babies came from middle class genetic backgrounds. One went on to develop serious mental illness also requiring in-patient psychiatric care; the other is serving life (been inside for 28 years now) for murdering his adoptive parents, adopted sister and her twins sons. So we have 3 members of an adoptive family ie non genetically related:

Mother serious mental illness
Daughter serious mental illness
Son serving life for murdering 5 members of his adoptive family

Something not right?

Oh apologies I've just posted again as I thought I had lost my previous post.

Perhaps, HoGo1, you should start another thread on your topic if you wish to continue to discuss it as it doesn't appear to have much to do with the OP?

HoGo, you keep saying the babies were from 'middle class genetic backgrounds'. You do realise genes and social class are unrelated, right?

OP, good luck.

'Middle class genetic backgrounds' - you know middle class people get seriously mentally ill too, right?

But I honestly don't understand the point you are making. Is it a specific point about the Bamber family, or something with wider relevance for adoption?

Yes apologies for not explaining myself very well. The point I was endeavouring to make is that my understanding of babies/children available for adoption today is that they are by and large from low socio-economic groups where neglect and abuse is involved plus the bm's are often suffering from various addictions eg alcohol/drug? This clearly puts the adoptees at risk of developing problems in childhood/adulthood regardless of adopters providing good, loving and supportive home environments?

In the case of the Bamber family none of the above applied and yet we have:

Adoptive mother serious mental illness
Adopted daughter serious mental illness
Adopted son serving life for murdering the above plus his adoptive father and his adopted sister's twin sons.

(Adoptees from different birth families.)

I was just seeking your views re whether you think the adoptive mother should have had the first child she adopted removed based on the fact that she developed serious depression as a direct result of her decision to adopt. Thanks to those who responded. It appears that you think she should have been able to keep the child on the basis that a bm who develops PND would not have her child removed. I disagree PND is generally hormonal (physical) and not psychological.

HoGo, that's not the question this thread was asking.

It is an interesting question, but it'd be better to make your own thread for it. That way the OP can get answers to her question.

Are you trying to say that Jeremy Bamber was going to murder because he was adopted? Or because his mother allegedly had post adoption depression? Or the combination of the two? Because post adoption depression is very common (possibly more common that PND) and I can't remember many (any?) cases where killers were adopted children of the family they killed. I mean I'm sure it must have happened across the world but I don't see any evidence that its any more common that adoptive children kill their families than any other non-adopted person.

I'm not sure what the relevance is of what causes depression - hormones or situations or brain chemistry? I think the point being made was that having depression alone is not a sufficient reason for removing a child unless the child is considered to be at risk. This isn't any different whether a child is adopted or birth.

Whether the Bamber parents would have been considered for adoption today is hard to tell without being privy to all the personal information. Certainly the requirements of adoptive parents was much lower in the 1960's and the preparation much less.

I'm not sure you can take a case of adoption from the 1960's and make any conclusions of value about modern adoptions.

AndWhenYouGetThere I have made a thread on 'News section'. Just wanted to check your views on the adoption angle. Apologies if I've derailed.

I'll just respond to Kewcumber if I may and then I'll leave you to it.

Kewcumber I don't actually believe Jeremy Bamber murdered his family I believe his adopted sister was responsible. I do think that an adoptee whether new born or months/old is at risk of some sort of attachment issues and the fact that in this case the new born was separated from her bm then went to a nursery for a few weeks until adopted. Am then went into hospital so yet another separation.

Depression has been shows to adverse effects whether adopted or not:

developingchild.harvard.edu/resources/reports_and_working_papers/working_papers/wp8/

Adoptees who kill:

www.adoptionunchartedwaters.com/understanding-adoptees-who-kill.php

I wish you all well with your adoptions applications. You sound like great prospective addopters. Best wishes HoGo1 x

Sorry I am not claiming that adoptees do not kill ever just that I have never seen any evidene that killers are more prevalent amongst adoptees. That link also doesn't say so either though to be fair I haven;t read it all.

I'll have a look and comment on your other thread when I get a chance, if I have anything to add.