15,000 Kids and Counting...Episode 3

[Lilka]

Tonight at 9, on Channel 4

The Transition

The final episode of the series charts the transition from familiar foster home to the unknown of new adopted parents

As reality sets in, adopters and the children alike discover that the prospect of learning to love and fit in to a family that were once strangers can be daunting, and the stakes are high, with both sides asking the same question: 'Will they like me?'

Me too wishing that they hadn't "reassured Lauren's feelings away" - children are concrete thinkers and to talk to them about abstract concepts is never going to work - the contrast when they had the book and saw the DVD proved this beyond any doubt. I was worried about the male adopters thing with the handshake, especially as it was the very first thing he did with Lauren, and poor little Liam walked away looking very confused, but Lauren later seemed to realise it was a trick and was enjoying it.

There have been a lot of posts about Lauren and scenes with her and the sw and with her foster carers, but very little has been said about Liam. It's almost like he was just an "add on" - I know he is only 3 but not too young to talk to him whilst playing with houses, cars, play people etc. I wish the sw had done more of this with both children, though she was colouring with Lauren in one scene.

Hope all goes well for them.

I wondered about confidentiality too and presumably birthparents must have given their consent, but as has been pointed out the children couldn't give their consent. But if the programmes mean that more people come forward to consider adoption it has to be a good thing.

I know it is the normal practice to ask adopters to consider a sibling as happened with Destiny, but I was worried about the boys, because they were very young (think the youngest was not yet 2 ?) and the oldest just 3, and it is always stated that adopted children need to be the youngest in the family so they don't have to compete with younger children. Obviously the adopters were delighted with the baby girl (who was very sweet) and were talking of "pretty frocks and bows" or something. In the brief clip that we saw the littlest boy took something from the baby and he was told not to snatch - wasn't sure what happened next but the father called out "oy oy" or something to one of the boys and then he went out of the room with his mother.

Just hope all goes well for them too and the little boys' placement is secure.

My thoughts exactly Myfeet.

And yes, by all means promote adoption, but don't use vulnerable children, who may well look back at footage in later years and be unhappy about it.
More people coming forward is a good thing for adoption yes, but not necessarily so for Lauren and other filmed children like her. If she was impacted positively by the programme then that's something I suppose, but in later life that might not be the case.
I feel that Adoption is something that people either do or don't want to do. I can't imagine watching a programme and thinking 'Yes! Adoption. I want to do that!' and never having thought about or considered it before.

These programmes do help to banish some common myths though.
My one hope for the children filmed is that they do gain some precious footage of themselves showing positive interactions with their birth parents and foster carers.

coldfeet I see you are carrying on your "fight" with me and I think that says more about you than it does about me to be honest. I am assuming I'm the PP (professional person?) Except that I'm not, as I am retired and am just an ordinary OAP now. I'm not going to bother to defend myself to you because it is clear that you are going to find fault with anything I say.

No one is carrying on anything Nana, honestly. There's nothing personal going on here, no one cares who says something (unless it's JH or IJ or one of our resident trolls back again). She disagreed with what you said, and that's all we do, agree and disagree with what everyone else said.

PP = Previous Poster, and OP = Original Poster

Overall, I've been very impressed with this program. Yes, the consent and privacy is definitely an issue. What they've put on the screen though, was for the most part sensitive and carefully done, and hopefully got people thinking.

But agh, the blue eyed blonde hair comments got me mad

Also, everyone on these programs who ever goes on about girls and how adopters want girls, needs to go look at the stats released about finalised adoptions. There are EQUAL numbers of boys and girls adopted, roughly. I think it was 51% boys last year, 49% girls. There's has NEVER been a year in the stats where girls adopted has exceeded the number of boys adopted by a significant margin, and indeed in the last few years it's been over 50% boys every year, but only by a very small margin

Initial desire for girls, which I'm sure exists, is not actually resulting in more girls being adopted. So I wish ALL of these programs would just acknowledge that and stop adopter bashing

Rant over

I was worried about the male adopters thing with the handshake, especially as it was the very first thing he did with Lauren, and poor little Liam walked away looking very confused, but Lauren later seemed to realise it was a trick and was enjoying it

That made my heart sink. I realise that introductions on camera are bound to be even more difficult than normal, but I thought he displayed no empathy whatsoever. I hate teasing generally, but in the case of meeting a vulnerable child for the first time, surely you'd try to be more low-key and "kind"? It made for uncomfortable viewing.

We'll have to agree to differ Lilka but I certainly don't intend to de-rail the thread. I've been thinking about the issue of consent and confidentiality. There will have been weeks and weeks of filming and then the vast majority of it edited out, and I think we maybe forget that sometimes, I know I do, and so the bits we see could be taken out of context. If anyone saw "Benefits Street" - they were filming that for 12 months!

The children would all have been subject to Placement Orders and the Parental Responsibility would therefore be with the LA, and it appears they have consented to the content of the programmes. I wonder if they were shown the edited version. The Legal Dept of the LA would definitely have been consulted. Also I think that as a matter of courtesy they would (or should) have got consent from the birthparents. Obviously the children were too young to give consent and that is something that is a matter of concern.

It used to always be the case that the identity of the adopters and their details were kept absolutely confidential, but certainly before I retired there were occasions when birthparents did meet with the adopters. I think that this was always offered to the birthparents (though not entirely sure) Their address of course would be kept confidential and children are usually placed for adoption outside of their home area. It was clear that care was taken about the adopter's house (in Lauren and Liam's case) as we only saw the front door and the inside. Think the same was true about the adopters for Destiny. The child's unusual name set me thinking about this issue. We always used to advise adoptive parents that in the case of older children they must keep the same name. With babies it was less clear cut and I think this was left to the adopters, though I think we suggested they keep the name given by their birthmother as a second name.

I agree the hand shake joke was a bad idea, but it was obvious he was as nervous as the children were. He was clearly hoping they would laugh and see he was fun and therefore break the ice.
I agree that they were incredibly brave allowing their intros to be filmed and I'm sure if any parents were filmed for two weeks mistakes would be found. Especially parents under pressure.
Nana I think they'd cut two snatching incidents together with Destinys parents. When her dad said oi don't snatch I thought the eldest boy had taken something from the second boy, and it was at least the second time he's been told not to take toys of his siblings. I could be wrong tho.
I agree the two boys were very young but I think the long-term benefits of all being placed together shouldn't be underestimated.
We can only hope that the sw's were satisfied that the boys were secure enough to allow the match to go ahead

I've been present at a fair few intros and a lot depends on the FCs I think, and their ability (or otherwise) to help put the adopters at their ease, but it's never going to be easy, as some posters have already pointed out. It also depends on whether the FCs agree with the match (and sometimes they don't) and that can be tricky. On one occasion that sticks in my mind, the FC was cuddling the baby (around 4 months) and kissing her, while the adopters (who were childless) sat nervously on the sofa. In the end I asked the FC if she wouldn't mind making tea and stood up to take the baby from her, and she reluctantly passed her to me and I was then able to pass her to the adopters. It was all very tense and I talked with the FC's social worker about it and she said she'd been worried about this particular FC as she was not very good at communicating with people. We made sure that one of us was there for the rest of the introductory period, but that was unusual.

Locoparentis I wondered how they had decided what to leave in after weeks and weeks of filming and Destiny's parents obviously gave their consent as the TV cameras would be there filming them. You say you hope the social worker's were satisfied that the boys were secure enough to allow the match to go ahead, but that wouldn't really be known until after the baby was placed and of course much will depend on the ability of the adopters to meet the needs of all three children, under 3years - not an easy task at all. As you say the long term benefits of the siblings being together shouldn't be under estimated.

Oh and thank you for the PMs again to offer support and I appreciate your concerns, but I really am not bothered by certain posts on this thread.

coldfeet you are perfectly entitled to disagree and to highlight that. nana , it's unhelpful to carry over perception of arguments from other threads as it means you aren't listening to another's perspective but judging it as a personal criticism. Maybe if you read the comment without that clouding your opinion you will hear a different message. As Lilka tried to point out, PP referenced previous poster not professional person. You heard a criticism of yourself as a social worker (former) based on a previous debate whereas the actual post was simply drawing attention to a comment they disagreed with.

Watching it again, very, very moving, we will be there soon.

I was wondering about the whole confidentiality thing. I was unhappy that medical information was discussed in a previous episode.

I can see that the programme does not necessary benefit the children mentioned in it, except to tell their story (which could be beneficial or not dependant on many factors - IMHO). However, I guess for every documentary that features children the same issue would occur, can children give their consent or refuse their consent, or are the adults in the case making decisions on their behalf? This is true for hospital documentaries etc where we hear from sick children. I guess it is only in cases where the information is sensitive that the children's identities are hidden.

I felt sorry for the birth parents, I know they must have given their consent to be part of the programme but I wonder why. And how they felt when it aired. Maybe they felt it would tell their story. maybe they felt it might influence the outcome etc. I don't know. I just felt very sad for them in all the episodes.

I thought all the adopters came across very well and the foster families were lovely.

Liam's face really lit up when in the dvd they introduced his new older brother. I agree he didn't get much screen time as am individual but hopefully he will thrive with more siblings as well as permanent parents of his own.

Yes everything counts that bit really brought tears to my eyes. How wonderful that he should be so delighted to have a big brother and also the big brother seemed lovely and I'm sure will be great with him.
They were both such lovely children but I think the focus has been more on Lauren as it's because of her age they were harder to adopt and also because she's the more vulnerable because she remembers so much more than Liam at the moment. That's not to say he isn't vulnerable or that in the future he won't need more support than Lauren. Only time will tell.

article from the independent

Wow, that's a lot of interest

I can't help wondering though how many of the 3,918 people who expressed an interest in adoption after the programs, will actually follow it through. Few, I sadly suspect. As much as it was a very well done TV program, it only presented a small bit of what adoption is and what the process entails etc, so I suspect a lot of initial interest will quickly wane. I always hope to be proved wrong, of course!

I agree Lilka none of my many friends who have adopted nor me were inspired by adoption programs it was in us. But if one child gets a home through these programs it is worth it

FWIW we were quite inspired by 'Find me a family' (ca 2009). Adoption had always been on our radar but it was only after that programme that we realised it could be a real possibility for us. For instance, because it showed that one can adopt older children; we had sort of ruled ourselves out because we didn't want to adopt a baby. (Somewhat ironically, we are now hoping to adopt a baby, as in 0-2yo. But there you go.)

It took us pretty much exactly 4 years however, to go and make that first phone call. Nobody is going to credit 'Find me a family' with that. And yet that programme had an important impact on our decision making.

Measuring impact of programmes like these is basically impossible. Many of those calls will end up as nothing. But even those that do eventually end up in new prospective adopters: Some who expressed interest after the programmes, might have called an adoption agency eventually anyway; just maybe not right now. For others, the programmes may have been the final straw, making up their minds after years of being undecided. Some who may always have wanted to adopt, but having ruled themselves out, now realised that it may be a real possibility. But even in those cases where the programme really did provide an input that will lead to people eventually adopting who may otherwise not have, it would be hard to tell because some of those will have called now, but others will make that call years down the line.

However the impact IMO shouldn't be reduced to 'how many new adopters are generated', but should also comprise a hopefully increased awareness and understanding of adoption issues throughout society.

I just said on the 15,000 kids episode 2 thread that....

"I said up thread that I didn’t like the foster dad saying these children are resilient! I think he said it because he wanted to show that despite the kids going through a lot they can weather those storms, as in they can still be very much able to be adopted and adapt. So I think I was a bit unfair on him!

I think these programs are aimed at getting people interested in adoption! Which is great. So sorry to the foster dad if I jumped the gun and was mean!"

I was very influenced by a programme about adoption from China, although my real life experience of going to a Romania orphanage probably set the whole thing off in my mind. Of course we did not end up adopting from China or Romania!

64x32x24, yes agree, hopefully increased awareness and understanding of adoption issues throughout society.

For me there the programme about China (I remember the couple adopted four children, they were America I think - he was tall and thin and the wife said people thought he was the tallest, whitest Chinese man they had ever seen as they assumed he must be Chinese as the four kids were. I think it was around 1991. There was also a programme about a Russian boy who had a limb disability, which influenced me.

Lilka if you are looking in can you find any of those programmes, with your magic media powers!

I think the idea of inspiring adopters is probably why the social worker made comments about people wanting babies and wanting blue-eyed or blond–haired! I would not want to argue with her, she has seen and done a job I know little about! So even though the people I know going through the process at the moment have never (to my knowledge) talked about blue-eyed or blond-haired) it may be true where she is. Also, of the 8 other adopters going through the process at the moment near me I think only 2 are in the process of adopting babies and only one other couple has expressed an interest in a baby. So my experience is quiet different form this lady’s.

Anyway, back to the point, maybe by saying blue-eyed or blond–haired and wanting babies is actually a 'call out' to all those folks watching who think (quite rightly) I'd like to adopt but I don't 'need' to adopt a baby or a blue-eyed or blond–haired child, I could make a good parent to one of these children who are waiing. So if that was her aim only time will tell if we can say job done on the recruitment front! I really hope we can. That newspaper article about the first4adoption website crashing is very encouraging!

Personally, for me, 'Finding Mum and Dad' did (I think) tip me over the balance form being open to a boy to being genuinely not worried if the child was boy or girl. Like some other adopters I had come into the process with quite a fixed idea, which has changed over the time I was in the process and changed again when I got to the matching point.

I wonder how normal that is; I think it is quite normal actually. I came into the process hoping for a girl, as young as possible, maybe mixed heritage because of my Asia connections, and now am over the moon to be adopting an almost school age boy! I would not swap him for the world. And I have not even, met him yet! How weird is that!

So these programmes probably do not make anyone go from no plans to adoption in 21 days but over a period of time they may well influence all of us to being more open. Which I am eternally grateful for!

Lauren's story really struck a chord with me, probably as she is the same age as my (bio) daughter. I really felt for her because her understanding is so much more sophisticated, like how she understood that looking at photos doesn't make you like/love someone. I was so so so heartbroken that she was worried they might not like her :( poor kid. I have two close friends that have adopted in the last few years so it's been on my radar (I took a long time to conceive DD, had miscarriages and now haven't got pregnant at all since having her) and the OH and I seem to want to go for it at different times I think. I had thought that when we do proceed, I'd want to adopt a baby (I think because of fear of previous trauma really) but seeing Lauren genuinely does make me see that differently.

That said, I don't think filming and identifying her like that is ethical and they could easily have made an effective film without giving away so much information about her.

I have just re-watched all three on catch-up on my own (pause button was much used and there was a lot of discussion first time round).

I have to say, I cannot see that pixellating out the children's faces would have had too much impact on the overall programme and would have helped preserve some privacy. So if showing faces was unneccessary, why do it? It feels a bit too much like customer recruitment to me.

Of course, then there is the issue of names...