Program on BBC2 at 10pm tonight called Protecting our Foster Kids

[Bringonthesunshineplease]

I'm going to watch as could be interesting. Just letting those interested know it's on in a few minute's. Filmed following Dorset county councils fostering service.

Watching it now. Should be interesting

Watching, heart in throat. I wasn't expecting this downturn - poor Amy.

Just tuned in. Trying to work out what's happened.

Can't watch without feeling emotional. Tissues in hand! So hard for two young, vulnerable girls. FC's have my admiration!

Wanted to watch but DH didn't have the heart for it tonight so will watch later in the week. Hadn't heard about it so thank you Bring.

Oh no.... so sad. Poor girls!

It's really sad. Fostering must be so tough.

Amy seems not to have a good grasp of her life story and the reasons for coming into care.

So sad. Those Foster Parents were so lovely. Must be shit being fostered and knowing if you fuck up, like teenagers do, then you can be sent packing

Next week's one with babies will be hard to watch.

Think having her sister there for longer than she could deal with didn't help and may have also reminded her of their past experiences. Glad the fc's are still doing it although short term which we all know can not be that short term at all and that her next placement seems to be better for her. A job for very special people who have my total admiration!!!!

Will be watching next weeks with tissues in hand again for sure.

I watched this with so many mixed emotions.

I felt the SWs shot themselves in the foot having the FCs take Amy's older sister. Everyone seemed to know they needed to be separate, but yet they still ended up together. Which, co-incidentally or not, seemed to lead to a downturn in Amy's behaviour. I'm not sure Amy stood a chance from the moment that decision was made.

But also the FCs, who were lovely, did seem underprepared for the realities of fostering troubled teens long term.

But mainly I saw the life my AD1 might have had had she stayed in care any longer, given that she was nearly 8 when placed with us, and was approaching the age of being considered 'unadoptable'. Instead with us she has had stability, and a forever commitment, which those 2 girls so needed.

Totally agree Bringonthesunshine - the girls should never have been placed together again though made me realise how hard it must for Social Services to find placements for teenagers. I have felt very choked up and has really made me wonder whether we could do this in a few years.

Found it v interesting how poor Amy kept on saying she was being rejected and abandoned almost as a joke. Her way of coping...

I'm quite annoyed now.

Having re watched it (missed first half hour yesterday)

Firstly in contracts of expectations the SW said any more breaches of trust you will need to move placement was really unhelpful. She's scared and vulnerable threatening her with that isn't helpful.

Amy said from early on she didn't want her sibling there. No one listened and acted upon that.

When SW came she asked if she should see them together or separately. She should have seen them individually then together if appropriate. Looking at Amy's nonverbal communication was very telling. Again child's view not considered or acted upon.

It was typical resource led placement decisions.

So very sad to see these girls so vulnerable and yes I agree putting them together really did change Amy's behaviour and you could see there was no real relationship between them at that time. Her sister Natalie felt very guilty about everything going wrong and blamed herself so no one benefited at all from the sisters being fostered for that period of time together.

I know I'm coming from a perhaps biased view here as we are awaiting a match but it really did make me feel that adoption at 10 years old when Amy was first taken into care may have given her the one to one she needed, stability and a feeling that she was chosen. Also her sister could have benefited I think as well as foster care is just one miserable failure after another for them.

I saw it - I think the sister, Natalie, got sent there because there was no one else to go and SS were relieved to find someone who would take her in and thought everything would be ok as Amy seemed to have settled in so well. It started with such optimism.

The thing I took away from the programme was the desperate sadness and frustration of the situation: Amy behaved herself at first and then, when she felt that she was fitting in, decided to "test" her new family, to see if they did love her as much as they had assured her they did/liked her more than Natalie. And, guess what? They didn't - and this in no way blames them, she was hard work - and she had to move on. I think she even said at one point that it always ends up like this, there was just an inevitability about it.

oasis I am no expert in these things but how likely would it have been that Amy would have been adopted at 10, even if that had been an option? I agree, it would be brilliant if young people in long term care could generally be adopted but, perhaps understandably, there isn't much appetite for them among potential adopters.

lalalonglegs, there are adopters on MN who have adopted dc of that age and parented them with great love and care. But it is quite unusual. On my prep course, I remember us discussing adopters not wanting children of this age and the sw saying that, actually, the issue is more that children over 8 will rarely accept anyone else stepping into a parental role. They will often have spent a significant amount of life with their birth families and can't make the transition to new parents.

Yes, absolutely - I think a child would feel very torn if s/he had a strong connection - even an unhealthy one - with a birth parent. I'm sorry if my post sounded as if I was criticising people who were considering adoption for not being matched with older children - I know it does happen occasionally and I am sure the people who do it are very capable parents.

It's shit really isn't it? Imagine if teens in 'good-enough' families had to move out when they pushed boundaries.

I was really shocked about that program; unless it was clever editing it seemed her placement was under constant threat; Amy was saying "this always happens". I couldn't believe the attitude of the foster father; he seemed so blase about it "I said if it starts to affect my work then I've had enough"

I'm genuinely not being judgy as my own house is far from perfect but I was also surprised at the state of their house; it looked as if it was falling down in places and damp patches on the walls; I thought SS would have been strict about this?

They seemed like very nice people. It was quite shocking when they suddenly seemed to want to disrupt the fostering as soon as they hit some turbulence - the social worker certainly seemed unimpressed. But we don't know how it was edited. They may have been naive. They may have been underprepared. It is so hard to recruit and retain enough good foster carers - that probably underpins all the other problems here.

There's a post about this on the fostering board too. It's been pointed out to us that it's Fostering Fortnight and recruitment is high priority at the moment. Co-incidence?

As a foster carer myself I doubt the full extent of Amy's problems were shown (would put off potential carers!) as I don't believe any foster carers would give up on a child for the relatively small issues shown. Plus Amy had already had three placements breakdown, for reasons we weren't told.

Anon33, SS aren't that strict about our houses (thankfully! My own has damp areas) as long as there's no health and safety issues. And until they introduce a "wear and tear" fee (for which, read holes punched in walls, cupboard doors ripped off hinges, wallpaper picked off walls and so on) I refuse to have an immaculate home.

Programme 2 on now and I'm expecting an emotional rollercoaster. Why am I shocked they have just said every 20 minutes a child comes into care.

This is very upsetting. Poor little boy.