This thread was not about me, but I was on the receiving end of some pretty dreadful comments. It has taken me a while to do this, but I'd like to clarify a few things. After this, I won't be posting again or reading threads in this section.
My interest in adoption comes from the fact that I am adopted.
I was demonised for my posting style yet none of my posts have ever been deleted by mnhq to the best of my knowledge - in fact, I reported my own posts on this thread and they still weren't deleted. I had previously posted advice in this section and had received "thank you"s from adopters. I have taken part in discussions which have civilised and not contentious. So a lot of the crap aimed at me on this thread was just that - crap.
I am/was not rubbernecking or an arsehole and I think it is pretty dreadful to say that to someone who has not said anything to deserve or warrant it.
I came to this section after reading some comments by adopters in AIBU which I found worrying. I found them worrying because they came across to me as being aggressive and overwrought and oversensitive.
The question I asked Family: a group of adopters assumed my question to be about child protection, and I was on the receiving end of some inappropriate comments because of this, but in fact my question was related to child development. I didn't explain this at the time because it is difficult to express it without sounding uber critical. Many comments are made in this section about specific problems faced by a child caused by a specific thing which the adopter says the birth mother has done or not done. That is what my question was about - not wanting to know about why the child had been taken into care (I already know a great deal about that...), but to do with the developmental issue raised and why the bio mother was being blamed. The reason I asked was because many of such threads in this section show, to the best of my knowledge, a lack of knowledge of normal development. For example, on one thread an adopter had said that their chid was not yet walking at xx months and it was the fault of the mother not doing xy and z. Yet the child was within milestones, ie normal, and the likelihood was that the issue was nothing to do with what the bio mother had or had not done. A similar theme came up re speech many months ago. A more recent thread in adoption was about behaviour of 4 year olds. Another about appropriate activities to do with a 9 month old. These are just examples. If a parent (adoptive or bio) does not know what is normal and average for a child at any particular age, and they aren't trying to do research to find out wider than anything adoption related, then that is worrying.
Child protection - I was asked what my views were, and some of my comments were misinterpreted, so just to clarify that I believe that children need to be protected and that some environments are not suitable for children, full stop. I think that in some cases, the situation is not so black and white, and that with more or different support a parent would be able to keep children and in addition in relation to children removed and taken into care/fostered/adopted they are for one reason or another unfortunately going out of the frying pan into the fire. I think mistakes are made both ways. I think that the the term "neglect and abuse" is thrown around on this section in the context of 95% of children being adopted come from backgrounds of "neglect/abuse", but it does not always seem to be appreciated that within that umbrella term is a huge range of situations going from the most serious intentional harm all the way through to poor parenting all the way through to risk of future harm and so on and so forth. In some situations of "neglect" there has been a lack of boundaries, risks taken with personal health, etc there will also be a great deal of love and fun and happiness. This is relevant in relation to contact after adoption. Some of the adopters have said that contact should not happen where there has been "neglect/abuse" is too simplistic. And my final point is that there is a difference between child protection and adoption and in this section in discussions the two are mixed up, making it difficult to have discussions, hence my having avoided this issue.
Devora - am I lecturing? it is because yes I do feel that there is a huge lack of understanding amongst many of the adopters who post regularly, many of whom are in the early stages, and that the same adopters are not interested in discussion - I don't think it was me who was reluctant to exchange ideas and discuss.
Forced adoption - I have found some of the old "JH" and other threads which I think were being referred to. My reading is that JH and the other posters were concerned about social work practice, and about the courts being in bed with social workers and mistakes being made. And many of the adopters feel/felt that that was utterly ridiculous and insane and mere conspiracy theories and trolling. Then there was Re BS which was misunderstood by many (and referred to as a "ball ache" recently!). Re BS is an easy read and is easy to find online. In the case, sws were slammed for a trend of not providing reports on why children were being removed from bio parents but instead just providing reports about what the children needed going forward and why the adoptive parents could meet the need. The case also slams the trend of judges going ahead and making orders based on such lack of or inadequate info. There are no new obligations just a slamming of existing responsibilities not being met. It is not a huge jump of imagination to realise that there may have been some wrong decisions made (because adoption orders were being made in the absence of any information as to why children had been removed in the first place). The main criticisms raised by people who were campaigning against forced adoptions at that time were to do with sw practice and court practice and then the fact that there would be zero contact. I think that the recent appalling case of a 6 year old being murdered by a violent father means that bad decisions were made both ways, but it would be disingenuous to think that there are/were no issues at all surrounding adoption orders at that time. And just to clarify for the avoidance of doubt that i have zero personal experience of forced adoptions and have never met or spoken to a campaigner.
In relation to adopters calling people who are not fans of adoption "arseholes", in fact it is often people who have a great deal of experience of adoption who are not fans (which is not to say all people with experinece are not fans). Not being a fan of adoption is not the same thing as not being a fan of child protection. I personally think that much of adoption practice is an anachronism and it needs an overhaul. As does child protection and dissemination of child development knowledge.
The term "birth mothers" - the respectful adoption language was devised for the benefit of adopters not the children/adoptee. I would doubt that a child psychologist would choose the term "birth mother" as the best term for a child to refer to their bio mother but I might be wrong. There is a difference between children adopted as babies who only really know their adoptive parents as parents, and a child who has already had a relationship, even if lacking, with their bio parents, in terms of whether that term is appropriate.
@Jidgetjones, in relation to my comment about loyalty to bio parents, I didn't say that a child should be attached to bio parents but that they usually are, even where there has been abuse and neglect (especially if it has not been extreme) - it is complex but afaik this is generally known and accepted, and it was my experience, and I made the comments because I don't think some of the regulars in this section understand it. Obviously there are exceptions and some people have enormous difficulties with how their bio parents treat them, long into adulthood. But in this context the issue I believe is that many adopters want to be the real parents, the only parents, and they feel threatened by the other parents (this is an expressed view of a leading family court judge also). Without the empathy for the birth mother I do not believe that adoptive parents can provide the support needed to the child - and adopters signed up knowing this and so should follow through. Many adopted children find it extremely difficult to address these feelings as they are afraid of upsetting the adoptive parents or rocking the boat.
we usually have first/second Mum, or English/other nationality Mum, or 'Susie' (not her real name).