Adoption

[Lancome]

I didn't know where to post this, but can anyone tell me if it's possible to Un- adopt a child. Give up all parental responsibilities?

[Italiangreyhound]

Kacie123 it is terrible but I do think this kind of level of disruption is not common. Spero any ideas how common this is?

I Googled 'percentage of UK adoptions that break down' there are different stats and I can't make head nor tail of them but I can read this....

"One thing that is known to make a huge difference to the success of adoptions is the speed with which a child is taken from its potentially perilous birth family and placed with what it is hoped will be its 'forever family’. Martin Narey, the former chief executive of Barnardo’s, says, 'The really successful adoptions are when the child starts with the adoptive parents while still a baby. The older a child is when they are adopted the greater the likelihood of a disruption, and the younger the child is the smaller the likelihood of breakdown. It is better at two than three, but best of all when a child is a few weeks old.’ "

www.telegraph.co.uk/women/mother-tongue/8283942/When-adoptions-go-wrong.html (it's from 2011 so quite old).

But the trouble is that birth parents seem to be given quite a long time to 'get themselves together' or whatever the correct term is. And this is sometimes what people say they want, for the birth parents to be able to make the changes needed, forgetting that a year or so is a short time in our lives but for a small child, it is a huge amount of time.

And actually in addition to how old a child is when taken into the looked after system or adopted, there is also the issue of how many moves they have from birth family to their adoptive parents care.

This seems to be quite interesting... suesspiciousminds.com/2014/04/10/adoption-breakdown-research/

"•Between April 1st 2000 and 31st March 2011, 37,335 children were adopted and of these 565 were known to have disrupted post order and information was available in the database.
• Nearly two thirds of disruptions occurred during the teenage years.
• Gender and ethnicity were not associated with greater risk of disruption.
• The children whose adoptions had disrupted were significantly older at entry to care (average 3 years old) in comparison with children (average 1 year old) whose adoptions were intact. Nearly three-quarters of all the children had been abused or neglected.
• Children who had experienced a disruption also had significantly more moves whilst looked after and waited longer to be placed with their adoptive family compared with those children whose placements were intact.
• Children who were no longer living with their adoptive families were significantly more likely to have lengthier adoption processes compared with the children whose adoptions were intact. This was the case for those who entered care under the age of 4 years old and those who entered over 4 years of age.
• Three-quarters of the children who experienced a disruption were older than 4 years of age at placement with their adoptive family and a quarter were younger than 4 years of age. In comparison, 70% of children in intact placements were under the age of four.
• Children whose foster carers became their adoptive parents entered care at a similarly young age to those who were adopted by stranger adoptive parents. However, they waited on average two years before their foster placement was confirmed as an adoptive placement and were on average 5.2 years old at the time of the Adoption Order. In comparison, those adopted by strangers were only 3.8 years old at the time of the Order.
• Foster carer adoptions were not more stable than adoptions by stranger adoptive parents.
• The proportion of adoptions that disrupted varied by local authority"

[tokoloshe2015]

And yet the current legal situation is to keep children in birth family as long as possible.

'Beyond the Adoption Order' was a fairly long term look at adoptions (10-15 years if I remember) and found about a third of families were doing well, a third had significant difficulties but could see progress, and a third had significant difficulties and no sign of progress.

I do challenge the 'disruption shows adoption was a bad idea' view. DD1 was at the top end of the age for adoption (10) and we did disrupt when she was 16. But I think it was better than any other option for her, and having a Mum and sister is hugely important for her, even if she finds those relationships difficult. We give her a safe base and place she belongs, even if she can't handle living here. We'll see how things are after another 10 years or so! But we're still standing and still a family even though we 'disrupted'. (I do wonder whether respite would have helped, but it was never an option we had)

[Hels20]

I read the case you posted the link to last night, Spero. My worst nightmare too. And what is so horrendous to me is how the council so obviously turned on the parents and believed everything the girl said (the judge seemed to be much more balanced). Yes - the parents made errors (my God - don't we all) and that email is awful - but I would like to say that I would never write anything like that - but...if you are pushed for years and years and you have been hurt and rejected so much...well, we are all human.

It haunted my sleep last night. My worst nightmare too.

[combined02]

It is true about the respite requests not being met, but in other respects the parents had in fact had a lot of help, such as regular camh input, much of which they had struggled to understand/failed to put into action (as per both the evidence eg para 35 and the findings of both the expert and the judge). In relation to the child being "believed" over the parents, I think it was more that the child was showing clear signs of anxiety, and the parenting methods were acknowledged by all to be somewhat strict and pressurised, so there was obvious a problem. K is noted to have stress related skin sores (and headlice...) when she entered Greendale.

I find para 58 - 60 pretty appalling, and the judge although not finding the parents culpable highlighted the inappropriateness of some of the things they had said and done and written. I think the judge was right to be supportive of the parents because of the significance the care order might have in relation to their livelihood - but the care order went ahead notwithstanding and that is significant presumably.

To me some of the comments made by the adoptive parents show how utterly unsuited they were to the role - the fb post having been written after calm had returned and so is there really any excuse for such incredibly immaturity? It is one thing saying the wrong thing in the heat of the moment, quite another doing or writing something after having had time to reflect.

It seems they had their heart in the right place and very good intentions, and all things being equal they were very nice people, but even with respite and help wouldn't have been up to the role.

Older children being adopted are going to struggle even if there has been no abuse or neglect - taken out of one or more environments with their rules and expectations and put into another - quite often a square peg into a round hole. I think they need exceptional people to adopt.

In relation to adoptions failing after AO, as opposed to before, I am not sure there is much difference from the perspective of the child - when placed they are told about the forever nature, and at that stage the relationship with bp is significantly altered - on one of the documentaries an adoption had failed 3 year in but before the AO and I would say the affect on the child no less significant because the AO had not been granted.

[tokoloshe2015]

combined the judge makes it clear that a care order is not the right option, but the least worst option among those available (as he had no authority to make K a ward of court.

As the parent of a teen with attachment issues (though not as extreme as K) I have a lot of sympathy for the parent's. They weren't the right parents for K, but were put in that position because they were lied to by the placing agency. And frankly, the professionals do not necessarily have much idea of what they're talking about. It seems that the professionals at Greendale have ended up doing nothing any different from the parent's.

[tokoloshe2015]

And I agree about the pre-AO/post AO difference from the child's point of view. But it does make a diffence when quoting statistics, as different definitions of 'disruption' will give different figures.

[combined02]

Toko, I agree with what you say, except that the judgement notes that Greendales have done things completely differently other than the physical restraint which was the same.

[tokoloshe2015]

Whatever techniques Greendales are using, they are getting similar results. Doing well at school, explosions to the point of needing physical restraint at home. Greendales with a team of trained staff, who get time off and supportive supervision.

A couple of months ago I slapped DD2. She bit me and took me by surprise, and I just reacted (she has tried to bite me any number of times but in the context of an obvious meltdown). The one and only time in 6 years, and once we were calm I apologised. But I am sure the DDs between them could rake up a dozen incidents from the past 6 years that would make my parenting look appalling.

Then you get the situations where the professionals give contradictory (in fact opposite) advice - do I listen to teacher and counsellor or psychologist and OT? Whatever I do i have 'ignored the professionals'.

Then you get the deliberate distortions on top because DD's means of survial from an early age is to present herself as a victim.

I quite agree that these parents were not right for K. The professionals making the.placement need to take responsibility for that. I wonder if anyone would have been the 'right parent', and whether there are enough 'right parents' for children who have been abused to this extent.

I would wholeheartedly say my DDs should have a better parent than me. But compared to the other options available (including residential care and long term foster care) I am bl**dy amazing.

Many adopters further in than me have said that their DC carried on maturing well into their 20s. I have an agreement with myself that until the girls are at least 30 there is still all to play for!

[3point14159265359]

but even with respite and help wouldn't have been up to the role

Then they're still, IMO, not to blame. In approving them, the LA found them to be up to the task and so the LA is to blame as much as anyone (except the birth parents but apparently we're not meant to say that.)

I say this all the time, but I can't believe there's no mechanism in LAs for going back to adopters down the line and seeing if their assessment process worked. How do they know that the people who said they'd be good therapeutic parents are? How do they know that you didn't gamble the house away or develop an alcohol dependency? Unless the family end up in crisis, they simply don't know.

In every company I've ever worked for, if you spend time and money on a process, you sometimes spend more time and money after the fact to check that your original process is fit for purpose.

[3point14159265359]

combined, I've had stress related skin sores (eczema) ever since my LO came home 3 years ago. It only takes a tiny increase in normal stress levels to break out - whilst it's unpleasant, it's not really a barometer of anything.

And nor are headlice. Especially as I'm guessing K wouldn't have been particularly tolerant of treatments.

fb post having been written after calm had returned and so is there really any excuse for such incredibly immaturity?
It's been a few days since I read the judgement so I might be a bit vague on details, but I can imagine a situation where the calm had returned and mum thought she was bringing calm, rational, caring closure to a hideous situation where K had made it clear she didn't want to be part of the family anymore. She was trying to have a non-shouted, 'moving forward' exchange with K. Obviously, I can see that that's not how K probably saw it (or the rest of us) but I can see where it possibly came from that's not 'incredible immaturity'.

[tokoloshe2015]

3point not only that, the placing LA deliberately withheld information that made it clear K's background was one that the adoptive parents had made clear that they didn't think they could cope with

[3point14159265359]

Exactly that toko

I see a lot of judging on this thread and all I know is, if I've not walked in those shoes (and I pray I never have to), I'm not judging anyone.

FWIW, I can also see how using a normal parenting punishment/reward type approach, you could also end up with the trophies getting thrown out.

I'm not condoning it, but I absolutely see why it could happen. If you've got a child who doesn't respond to it, or who doesn't see the worth in things, yet you stick to a punishment/reward approach, you would be forever seeking something that means more to the child in the belief that finally they would care and change their behaviour to not suffer the consequence you have sought out.

So you start off with not letting them go to dance class this week because of behaviour, behaviour doesn't improve, so trophy gets temporarily removed, behaviour doesn't improve, parents threaten permanent removal of trophy, behaviour doesn't improve, parents think 'I must follow through or she'll never take me seriously again', trophies end up in bin.

Which isn't obviously a good situation, but is a lot less callous than 'I know, I'll throw out your trophies because I don't love you.'

[Devora]

toko: I do challenge the 'disruption shows adoption was a bad idea' view... We give her a safe base and place she belongs, even if she can't handle living here. I think this is really important and I can think of one other much-missed poster whose teen is having a very difficult time, who would say the same.

3point: I say this all the time, but I can't believe there's no mechanism in LAs for going back to adopters down the line and seeing if their assessment process worked. How do they know that the people who said they'd be good therapeutic parents are? How do they know that you didn't gamble the house away or develop an alcohol dependency? Unless the family end up in crisis, they simply don't know. In every company I've ever worked for, if you spend time and money on a process, you sometimes spend more time and money after the fact to check that your original process is fit for purpose.
This is a brilliant point and we should be shouting it from the rooftops. I'd add that in many cases, post-adoption support isn't sourced from the original agency (I was approved by one LA, dd came from another, we are now living in a 3rd and as the adoption is over 3 years old we are the responsibility of this borough). So there is absolutely no learning loop in place at all, and reduced incentive for 'getting it right'.

Italian - thanks again for your lovely words of support, and your PM which I read on the train and which made me cry (embarrassingly, in front of two older women who patted my knee!). I am feeling in a very difficult place right now. I feel huge sympathy for those parents, without implying that I think they did nothing wrong - I'm sure they did loads wrong, not least because living in this kind of family conflict doesn't bring out the best in anyone. Sometimes I feel like I'm in an abusive relationship - which would sound mad to you if you met my beautiful, charming, sweet and loving child. She can be all those things and yet I found myself telling her last night that she was bullying me - she is 6 years old! She looked at me with great scorn and said, "For gods sake - bullying, really?!" It was not my finest hour, but at that moment that is how I felt. It reduces you back to a childlike state yourself, taking you back to your childlike fears (in my case, violence within the home).

combined, you say that they received lots of help but that isn't how I understood it - came across as short-term and fragmented to me. I have had 'lots of help' if you mean a few different professionals having brief conversations with me in which they gave conflicting advice, minimised what I was telling them, and assumed it will all be easily sorted if I followed their top 5 tips.

Remember that the parent-child relationship forms both parties, not just the child. How the dynamics in this family developed over time is the real story, and that is why 'help' has to be more than just instructions for parents to implement.

[tokoloshe2015]

Yep, been there, thankfully didn't get that far.

It's my fault for not establishing/ maintaining clear boundaries. And my fault for not being empathic enough.

You say you can't cope any longer, but when your actions show you can't cope then you are abusive.

Then the problem is your parenting, not the damage done before you had even heard of DC, which wasn't identified/acknowledged, let alone treated. I thought the expert evidence was quite clear that the problem *wasn't K's parenting from her adoptive parents, but the RAD from her abuse within her birth family.

[3point14159265359]

And whilst I'm moaning, I'm increasingly of the opinion that adoptive parenting is largely incompatible with full time employment.

Every single adopter I know (IRL) who went back or intended to go back FT had to scale back hours or quit working.

I think LAs need to be more honest about this too. (Though they're quite possibly unaware, see my previous post about lack of learning.)

[thefamilyvonstrop]

Devora

[Italiangreyhound]

tokoloshe2015 I also think you are bloody amazing. You are dealing with a situation few of us can even dream of. You are doing a great job, because in the situation you are in 'normal' is not an option.

You have made excellent points, re ...I think it was better than any other option for her, and having a Mum and sister is hugely important for her, even if she finds those relationships difficult. Such an important point to make, we are not talking about moving children around from one family or place for no real reason, we are talking about kids who are not safe in birth families (not speaking of your dd necessarily but generally) and so the object is to work out what is best in the circumstances, not in an ideal world!

Re I do wonder whether respite would have helped, but it was never an option we had, it is so awful that something so simple could make a difference. I wonder at all the people who could provide respite care for an occasional weekend. People with enough space and time and energy for a weekend or so. They could make such a difference. Our son's foster family also did respite care, they were and are utterly amazing and had such love for the children they cared for.

Combined re but even with respite and help wouldn't have been up to the role. I don't know how you can know this, even if you knew them personally. They went to hell and back, I am not sure calm return very quickly after that. but as tokoloshe2015 pointed out, the parents knew they could not cope with certain things and so they were lied to.

The birth family destroyed this child's life, maybe they too had had their lives destroyed within their family, there are families where abuse runs from one generation to another. The local authority failed the child terribly but the main thing seems to be that a few mean things were done by some very stressed out parents. That just doesn't make sense.

Re I think they need exceptional people to adopt. Maybe they do, maybe they don't. Maybe we need to acknowledged some parents just can't parent and don't get to hang onto their birth kids f*cking them up for years before the state is able to step in!

With regard to any disruption after the adoption order, I agree, I don't think children are more or less upset after it has been made legal. Time, I am sure plays a big factor but so does other stuff. But the key point is the adoption order is a legal milestone.

Devora thank you, you nearly brought tears to my eyes! What are we like! Re Remember that the parent-child relationship forms both parties, not just the child. How the dynamics in this family developed over time is the real story, and that is why 'help' has to be more than just instructions for parents to implement. SO true. What help did those poor beleaguered parents want? Respite. What was not offered, respite!

[Italiangreyhound]

PS Loads of kids have nits, they are incredibly hard to get rid of even if a child is willing to let you comb their hair through. DD had them for ages, just once, and was very compliant with the combing out. My relatives boys had them loads! It is not evidence of anything other3 than very small beasties that get into kids hair!

[Italiangreyhound]

Does any one with experience of all this wonder if the fact the parents were coming to this because they felt they wanted to do something good, have any impact in this? I adopted because I wanted another child. I also wanted to do something good but my overriding feeling was wanting to parent afresh again (birth dd was 9 when ds came). I just wonder if this has any bearing on how one copes when the shit hits the fan.

My overriding feeling is the child's early experiences coupled with failure of LA to tell the truth or provide respite, along with a small amount of adoptive parents not being able to adapt their parenting skills. This is not a criticism of the adaptive parents. I am not sure many of us could withstand this sort of thing.

[Devora]

See, I don't think it's tenable for people to expect adopters to be amazing or exceptional parents. Sure, we should be assessed a certain standard of good enough parenting, perhaps with some extra qualities of thick-skinnedness, thoughtfulness, resourcefulness (vital for battling for post-adoption care) and general empathy, understanding and knowing your own shit. But good adoptive parenting, I suggest, is for most of us learned not instinctive.

I think somebody upthread (or was it another current thread?) talked about how she practised attachment parenting very consciously and intensively, 18 months after placement. And Italian talked about the input she has had in the early months after placement. I think that should be the norm. The adoption system should find good enough parents and work with them, in partnership, to get the family dynamics right for every adopted child. At the moment, all too often it puts all its resources into finding people who it can decide are marvellous enough to take any kind of shit, and then abandons them.

[Devora]

thefamilyvonstrop - your flowers are hugely appreciated; I might just cry again!

[mybloodykitchen]

I was just about to say the same devora. If you have to be exceptional to adopt then we're quite comprehensively fucked aren't we? Where are these godlike figures to come from?

And jesus yes, why do they have NO follow up? Although we shouldn't be surprised. IME most all sws wouldn't know basic professionalism if it twatted them on the back of the head with a SMART target...

[3point14159265359]

I think if you set the bar at 'exceptional parents' you're going to end up with very few adopters. I'm certain many of those who would reach the bar would rule themselves out too.

Our training was terrible too. Literally the only thing I got out of it was that I needed to go and do some independent reading. If I had have taken that training as being sufficient, we'd have been screwed.

because they felt they wanted to do something good
Italian, I wondered about that too.

[mybloodykitchen]

And it was me with the attachment parenting and I get it wrong all the time. Right now iggle piggle is babysitting...

[tokoloshe2015]

I also had a ? about wanting to do something good. However, I also read into the situation (e.G. parents and older sisters around K with cushions trying to prevent her from hurting herself) that they did not give up easily. And they opposed the care order until the last minute - possibly out of a cynical concern for their reputation, but possibly because they see K as part of their family matter what.