15,000 Kids And Counting - On Channel 4, starting on 3rd April

[OneOfOurLilkasIsMissing]

Heads up folks, Channel 4 are doing a new adoption documentary "15,000 Kids and Counting"

Series Description - Child protection levels in Britain are at a record high. Over 15,000 children were waiting to be adopted in 2013 - twice as many as five years earlier

With unparalleled access to the entire adoption process, this series follows social workers, foster carers, birth parents and adopters as heart-wrenchingly difficult decisions are made about the future of some of Britain's most vulnerable children

Episode 1 is on 3rd April at 9.00PM, is called The Decision

The adoption process begins with the most difficult decision of all: the decision to remove a child from their birth family

The first episode in the series follows the social workers whose job it is to take children away from their parents and recommend whether they should ever return; and meets parents who are desperately fighting to keep their children

Episode 2 a week later - The Search

This episode follows the search for adoptive parents for a two-year-old boy and a three and seven-year-old brother and sister

With the added challenges of having slightly older children, siblings and a child with possible health issues to place, the task for social workers Annette and Jackie is a massive one

With the future of these children in their hands and recently set government targets to meet, they struggle not to become emotionally involved as they strive to find adopters before time runs out

I'll certainly be watching, looks interesting

I am doing the thing I really hate - judging a person without taking their circumstances into account. I wonder what Matthew's life was like growing up

I would like to foster /adopt once older dc leave home paticularly sn but have been told as Im disabled (full time wheelchair user )and single parent won't be eligible .
daft really as my house is already adapted.Im quite able and am bringing up 4dc on my own no help and ds3 has sn so have dam good idea whats involved

That Emily was really really sad, and obviously quite a young '18' year old, with a 26 year old man there was it? I knew something wasn't right straight away they can't possibly have anything in common, likes someone he can manipulate.
I say that as someone who became a mother at 19 with my 19 year old bf now husband with another dc, I don't come from a position of ignorance when it comes to teen pregnancy , I realise how lucky I've been being how impressionable teens are , there for the grace of god all of us.
I think this was made in my area , that matthew was on about getting back to 'Brinny' so South Yorkshire I'm guessing.
That curly haired social worker wasn't the brightest button was she? as awful as it sounds I wouldn't want my childs life in her hands tbh, the one who dealt with Nicola I liked she seemed competent.

plus once we left home my parents fostered teens and I provided respite/another ear so know not all sweetness and light

Who told you Human?

Such a sad program, good, but sad. I just came on here to say hi and that's it's rubbish that you all have to brace yourselves like this when the mainstream media gets into the topic of care and adoption

I saw this last night, and was really impressed - a well-made programme that managed to show some of the complexities in these situations.

Matthew was terrifying in the meeting. Telling the social worker, right in her face, to fuck off, and using intimidating body language the whole time....poor wee Emily in a relationship with him. Matthew's own background may have been awful, too, who knows?

How could Emily have left Matthew? I'm sure it would have been suggested to her, and maybe she had tried to. I think it's likely he would have come after her. A restraining order would have relied on her to call the police if he broke it. Would she have called the police? And the baby would be in this atmosphere of fear and trepidation.

The couple with their fifth child taken into care - needing 1 year and 2 years therapy, according to the psychological assessment...but babies can't wait for that.

And Nicola who could not keep appointments with her baby - not even the very last one. Yet she clearly cared but just couldn't get her act together to do this :(

Will def watch the next one.

I too thought it was a well made, balanced programme.

Emily seemed so like my DDs' BM, so young and vulnerable.
Hopefully as she gets older she will see the choices she has made and make new ones.

the science I went to a local council open session where they was looking for foster parents and was promptly turned down and told on what grounds

but not ruled out looking at private agency's in the future

I seen both bad and good social workers anf

I think being a SW relies heavily on being intelligent , good judgements perception etc she just seemed flatter that a week old coke, I can imagine some of her clients running rings round her.

What was that one recently the mum was white and the dad I think asian, and they had been having contact with him until he was 4 I think and then he got adopted and they had the 'final ever visit' so horrendous and heartbreaking, what was it called.

brighteyed was it "Panorama: I Want My Baby Back"?

It was filmed with Stockport Social Services, 'Brinny' is Brinnington...

brighteyed Social workers do not have a child's life in their hands. What you may "think" is not necessarily correct. Also not sure how you could assess her intelligence from a TV programme?

Hi, I watched the documentary last night and thought from the CPR's that we have read it was a very real picture of the birth parents who sadly lose their children who are adopted. I thought the SWs came across as very understanding and professional in the face of what must be a very difficult situation.

My DH and I have been matched with a child and will be going panel in a few weeks time. I noticed further up this thread that Kristina N said potential adopters are not interested in adopting 'black kids or kids called Chardonnay' but as a white person I would defend this and say at the moment as far as I am aware we are not allowed to adopt black kids but that the government is thinking of changing this situation because not enough black couples want to adopt. As for the Chardonnay I don't know!!

Sorry, family finder, I was being facetious .

People don't want to adopt children called Chardonnay they might if sw would let you change the god dam names

Also on the point of adoption black children I can tel you ow the law van say what it Ike's but if the sw wot carry it out it won't happen just Ike gay people adoption there home study takes longer and also they wait longer for matches and as a foster carer I know there are sw who would simply not place a child with a gay couple end of

I can pretty much say when the law changes the same rate of white couples as now will be allowed to adopt black children

Fusedog, what is you basis for such judgemental views on gay adoption?

I assume you are gay yourself and have first hand experience or have insider knowledge of government statistics? Maybe you work for Stonewall as their adoption adviser or are in fact Gove's adoption tzar?

Sweeping statements like that are dangerous.

Yes yes yes to helping vulnerable adults such as Emily or Nicola to turn their lives around. Ok it may not be in the baby's time frame, but for their own sake. (And we don't want them to be going on to have baby no 2, 3, 4... just to be removed again).

However the sad truth is, usually once a baby has been removed and placement order granted (decision that baby is to be adopted); then the birth mothers are dropped like hot potatoes. No support to deal with the grief; no support to change their situation (for their own sake); no preventative measures to help them avoid the same happening again.

When the woman turns up pregnant again (maybe it was the only thing she could think of to fill the hurting hole in her heart; maybe she got pregnant whilst seeking solace in random sexual relationship; maybe she couldn't control her fertility as she was hurting too much to stay away from drugs) - then it will often be too late again, too late for this new baby's timeframe. The mum may well be in an even worse situation than before - having had a previous baby removed, she might be struggling with depression, or have gone back to using drugs, or may be feeling paranoid towards social services and unable to engage with them.

And so the cycle continues. Baby No2 is removed as mum can't change things within the baby's timeframe. Once baby is gone, all support for mum ceases too, so when she gets pregnant with No3, she may well be in an even worse place.

Ok it may be hard, in general, to identify which people need preventative intervention and help, before it is too late. And there isn't enough money to go round to 'help' anyone who might sometime need it.
BUT once a baby has been removed, THEN the birth parents have been identified, and they should be getting a lot of support. And it is here where IMO the 'system' often fails.

On another note, regarding the programme. I am a bit wary still. This first part was all about babies, having been removed from BM right after birth. The second part will revolve around a 2yo with health issues, and an older sibling pair.
The children's backgrounds will be very different to the backgrounds we have been shown here.
The choices and decisions the potential adopters have to make, will be different than the decisions and risks involved if one were to adopt one of these babies.
I worry that the programme kind of suggests to us, 'we have shown you the background, now you can understand better what happens when looking for adopters' when in fact that is a false continuity. Looking for adopters for 6 months old babies who have been removed at birth, and been in stable foster homes since, is a completely different thing than looking for adopters for children with significant health needs, or older sibling pairs.
I worry that viewers will be led to think that the majority of adoptions are babies like the ones shown in part 1 ALL were. And the children in part 2 are those poor, poor (exceptional) kids who no-one wants (despite 'all she wants is a mum who doesn't drink, doesn't smoke and doesn't do drugs. Is that too much to ask?'). Which then may lead to sentiments such as 'I would take them all' and 'adopters just want healthy white babies, they are so selfish'.
We will see.

Fusedog - I Sincerly hope we don't come across a foster carer as ignorant as you.
I was in prep with another gay couple and we were both through home study quicker than the rest and the guys were matched with a problem free baby blue before they were approved. As for us as a female couple we are being offered babies left right and centre.

Before you spout your so called facts, check your grammar!