British Sikh couple refused to be allowed to adopt a white child

[MrsD79]

Interesting. Thoughts please..

Sorry, got muddled...it was the post above yours, sorry conserve...I take it all back (Although I stand by the rumours about tldr at Asda 😉)

Also, there's a much less colourful (sweary) but more balanced (boring?) thread about this over on AUK if you haven't seen it

Oi!

And I think Allthe meant my post (you can be right or you can get what you want...)

What's the AUK thread saying? I'm guessing similar to this? I read the comments on the Guardian FB story, that didn't help my blood pressure much. So much ignorance, not preventing anyone from having a very strongly held opinion...

I have no idea who is agreeing who anymore!

agreeing with who

I don't think you're that dim howto. So I assume you know that I meant that you should confine yourself to the argument not to having a go at people for what they always/often do from the security of none of knowing who the fuck you are?

Oh god! I don't know who anyone is anymore...It was for you trolley fucker...I just thought it must've been someone else less obnoxious 😝

Over on AUK for the most part everyone's saying the same as the adopters over here and just querying whether they were turned down for adoption full stop or just with one agency. Also focussing on whether they would be accepted for siblings groups with additional needs and whether they specified wanting to adopt a baby. It has also made me think of the fact that I've never heard of any BME adopters who adopted white children so really interested to find out if there are any on here. (Out of pure nosiness really!)

TLDR, I've stopped reading fb comments on news article since giving some poor commenter both barrels for suggesting that daily yoga and organic foods was a cure for recurrent miscarriage...I just moved to a new website 😬 And accidentally found myself tangled up in this thread!

I'm a bit lost too now into the beyond...think the majority of people here are making valid points...apart from maybe the OP

😮
Less obnoxwhats that now?

Has anyone mentioned why CORAM appear to be on the couple's side? That's confused me - I would have expected them to be on the side of accepting you can't/shouldn't assess everyone.

(When you said less obnoxious, did you mean less lazy? CBA to go read it, want you to provide summary... I'm almost ashamed.)

I'm not aware of knowing any BME adopters with white children but online, who knows?

That didn't come up at all about CORAM...interesting. Was that in the guardian article (too lazy to read that, i'll trade you... you give me a summary of it in return for my AUK summary.

The AUK thread wasn't too controversial... mainly everyone agreeing that there must be more to it than is being reported in the media. Couple of white adopters with mixed race kids commenting but in a well balanced, considered, non-mumsnetty way, one poster who may have had a bit of an axe to grind around being turned down for reasons not necessarily linked to race...all in all a very sensible mature discussion. No swears or name calling at all. Not even a little one.

Yes, Guardian story.

'the Coram Foundation, said she had never seen such a clear-cut case of the new adoption law being broken.

Speaking to the Guardian she said: “I am astonished because in our agency we have worked really hard to move people on to the law and their understanding of it.”

She said the case should highlight the new law and help end the old-fashioned practice of “same ways placements”.

Noon said: “It just so far off what the law says. They [the Manders] would have every grounds for complaint, because they have not been treated as they should have been. The law is really clear about prioritising all of children’s needs and not exclusively thinking about ethnicity and ethnic match.”'

www.theguardian.com/society/2017/jun/27/council-berkshire-refusal-british-sikh-couple-adopt-white-child-sandeep-reena-mander

I'm really surprised by that article, I do tend to try and read the guardian with a bit of a critical hat on as obviously there's a left wing bias there too (and I'm a fully fledged leftie liberal but sometimes it's hard to separate facts from opinions on both sides of the press) but I'm really confused...so have they been approved to adopt from the states? I totally get the dialectic here; i can see that they're being held back from something due to race, and then on the other hand when resources are so scarce for social care, why would the LA put funds into an adoption assessment which won't benefit them? I find it difficult to believe that there are no other VAs or LAs they could approach. I know some people get turned down by a few before finding the right ones.

I'm also confused by them saying anyone over the age of 18 can register their interest to adopt...I guess in theory, yes, anyone could register interest but they won't necessarily be considered or accepted. On one hand it's saying they've been approved (forced according to the the article...hate it when I'm forced to adopt kids from other countries against my will) to adopt from the states and on the other they're saying they want to register their interest to adopt with their local authority.

If they've been accepted elsewhere but are making a point then it makes a bit more sense that they're pursuing this...wouldn't necessarily be my priority to divert so much energy during the adoption process but I've never experienced discrimination due to my race so I guess it's not down to me to comment on that. Hmmmm...curiouser and curiouser.

Well, that is strange.

If they've 'been successful in being signed off from the Department for Education to adopt from the US', as is stated in that article then they've already been approved to adopt in the U.K., as the DofE bit comes after approval according to this website

Very much curioser and curioser

Isn't there also a massive cultural taboo against adoption from at least one sub continental culture/religion which practically results in zero children freed for stranger adoption (IIRC because of pressure in the community for others to step up where kids are at risk?) but I thought it was Hindu.

Does this ring any bells with anyone? Or am I talking out of my arse?

Not sure on this one. Makes some sense though. I've only ever worked with one Hindu family in 10 years of working for children's services (in a big multicultural city) but it wasn't an adoption case. Think they were completely bewildered by the whole safe guarding process and often said 'we're Indian, none of this makes sense to us' (as in culturally rather than language wise, dad and all kids were were born in the U.K) they had a child with LD so were referred to me from the disability team. It was all a bit messy but what I do remember was that they were completely confused by it all and that I was treated as a guest on every visit so left very well fed!

Into - I agree, I don't understand how they have already 'been signed off by the DofE to adopt internationally'.....that means they are approved adopters here in the UK.

I think they must mean they have registered an interest in doing so.

Sikh families would never usually become involved with SS, it is highly unusual to have any contact, likewise with hindu's. It would be a very long wait for a child who matched the religious/cultural background.

I simply don't see how you could place a white british child, into a sikh british family. When you look at the couple they are so obviously not white british I just would wonder what a child would want in terms of 'fitting in' with mum and dad as they grow up, and not being so obviously 'their adopted child'.
It must be so hard for the couple - as there is no easy answer here - and it has to be about the children who need families.

I think they must mean they have registered an interest in doing so.

Nnnoooooooo... you mean an article in the media about adoption contains factual inaccuracies?

Shut the front door...

Sorry to be late to the crazy party but I can't resist joining in.

Although you are approved to adopt intercountry prior to DCFS sign off, you are approved to adopt from a specific country. If a domestic match becomes available then you do need to amend your approval details and go back to panel (though I think some authorities do it by letter rather than attendance.

It is nearly always better for the child to have an ethnic match if possible in my very humble opinion. sadly that means white children will nearly always be able to find white adoptive parents and it will be much harder to justify placing a white child with non-white parents. Hard to rationalise that there aren't equally suitable parents of an ethnic match.

As we all know prospective adoptive parents rights are paper thin - basically they have the right to be considered.

Should I throw in a "fuck you bitch" to be in with the gang?