Adoption vs SGO

[primaryteacher90]

Hi all! This is my first ever post, so I apologise in advance if I break any conventions :-)

My partner and I are in the process of being assessed to become connected persons foster carers (used to be called kinship care) for my little niece (1yo). We are near the end (our assessment was very positive) and we are about to go to panel.

The social worker's plan is that once we have completed one year as foster carers, we would be eligible to apply for the full special guardianship order (SGO) and would gain majority parental control. We have repeatedly brought up that we would prefer to adopt her once our year as foster carers is up, but social services say that that would be impossible as I am biologically related.

Does anyone else have any experience with this? Has anyone adopted a niece or nephew outright? Are there any social workers who would mind clarifying?

Thank you in advance xx

I am afraid I don't know but wanted to wish you all the best.

After 12 months you can adopt in your own right have too give LA 3 months notice prior in writing, can then apply too Family Court cost is around £145 , will be duty of LA too provide all reports too the court, references, DBS, and all necessary formal information you will require are stipulated in the Adoption paperwork the courts provide.
Just Adopted following this route Successfully.
Can down load documentation prior too give you an incite From Webb
May need a solicitor. though not essential.

I really don't know enough (anything?) - but don't you get more financial help and training and some respite as an SGO?

As an SGO parent I get no support. I wanted to foster our nephew but was refused.
There is no real difference between sgo & adoption except you cannot change names or go abroad for more than 3 months.
As a lac the niece will be entitled to so much more in the future and so will you if the need arises.
Foster for a year and see how it goes...it is so much harder than you imagine - kinship care can get complicated, it has been for us sadly.

Thank you all for your replies so far.

Justhappy3- we unfortunately are unlikely to qualify for financial support due to our salaries. My understanding is that SGOs basically leave you to fend for yourself.

Bostonkremekrazy- while there are benefits to remaining an LAC child, it would mean continual involvement from social services.

Fasparent- it's great to know that it is possible! Was your child an LAC child prior to adoption?

Sorry - i do know nothing.
But i have personally found social worker involvement very helpful.

You can now negotiate with the LA to still receive funding under both SGO and adoption depending on circumstances. But I guess they're unlikely to tell you this. They won't want to pay as much as fostering but they can do it. I have a lac and they wanted me to have him on an SGO - to reduce their cost, not because it was in his interests A friend is currently adopting 3 LAC and has negotiated a package to continue funding.

Involvement from social services may or may not be wanted or needed after a year. You will probably find it will be very minimal involvement and the negatives of that will be outweighed by the huge benefits to your niece of being a LAC. It may be that she needs no support at all. But for now you don't know. Once she's no longer a LAC its too late to turn it back sadly.

What were you hoping for Adoption to give you that SGO cannot?

We are both young and plan to have our own biological children in the next couple of years. An SGO seems more appropriate to grandparents/foster carers, as in our case, the child will grow up with cousins/siblings around the same age. We would hate for her to think she was in any way less an equal part of our family as she was not ours biologically. Adoption would also mean the same surname as the rest of our family, as well as more practical benefits (she would be eligible for an EU passport for instance).

I see.
We have both adopted and SGO children.

SGO are used by aunts and uncles now much more often as it is much much cheaper option for SS - i'm surprised they made you become approved foster carers tbh....hey ho, SS are a funny bunch! (by the by I hope they are paying you as kinship FC now they have made you jump through the hoops!)
It seems to make no difference to the kids I know whether they have been adopted or hold an SGO, but I appreciate that not being able to share a name can become tricky. I know siblings where one is SGO and one a FC....that is complicated!
Our SGO child came from FC with a passport that SS had already sorted out...it is easier for SS to do this for you than to do this yourselves usually. (I'm not sure about the EU comment, does this mean baby or her parents are not British? This of course may complicate things passport wise.....)

Grandparents Plus is a good advice webpage, and gives advice on SGO for all kinship carers not just grandparents. Hope that helps :)

I'm sorry to say you're unlikely to be able to adopt without consent when an sgo is an option for the court. The test for an adoption without consent is that there are no other, less intrusive options and that "nothing else will do". So if an option is available which retains the link to the birth parents, the court will prefer this, in fact they have to favour an sgo over adoption. You need some legal advice. This should be funded for you by the Law, is that happening?

We aren't currently receiving any legal advice, and aren't represented by a solicitor. Social services are being quite closed off and haven't offered anything so far.

(I changed my username btw)

OP will the child's birth mum or birth father have onhoing contact with you/her?

Personally, if there are no discernable benefits to SGO I would push for adoption. I could be wrong but I think being legally adopted would feel more secure for you, your partner and this child. If this is what you want and is not being offered I would wonder why.

You do not need to say here but I feel the reason your niece is in care may be significant. I could be wrong. if your niece's birth parents have chosen to relinquish her is there any chance/risk that at a future date they may wish to be involved?

If the birth parents are unable to care for her and she has been removed permanently from their care then I think she deserves as much stability as possible. If you think that an SGO or whatever it is called is best then fine but if not, do ask questions and find out why certain things are being offered or not offered.

Lastly, if she has or develops special needs then would her not being legally adopted guarantee her better access to help?

Good luck.

The court will likely consider that an SGO offers permanency and stability, you’d have parental responsibility (sometimes shared with the child’s birth parents) and be able to make decisions for your niece. Adoption within a family network is rare and is thought to be confusing for the child in terms of their identify. The guidelines for SS are to keep the child within their family network if at all possible and adoption is an absolute last resort. They will consider one of the main benefits of an SGO within is the family network is to ensure the child has a continued sense of their own identity and belonging. It is because you are related that you are likely to considered a more appropriate permanent home for her than prospective adoptive parents.

It is possible to take child for whom you have been granted an SGO abroad and there are instances where family members have moved abroad for years or permanently with a child in their care. A lot depends on how much input the court expects the child’s birth parents to have in her life in the future.

Oh and an SGO doesn’t mean ongoing input and involvement from social services, once the order is granted responsibility for her wellbeing moves from the LA to you. Once the placement stabilises they back away, they don’t have the resources to stay involved if it’s considered there is no risk to the child. Occasionally an order will be made with caveats such as a specific agreement for contact with a child’s birth parents or siblings. Very occasionally an SGO will be granted with supervision which means SS will be involved for a specific period of time, this is usually where they think the placement is a good option but they are worried about physical or emotional risk such as a difficult relationship between the Special guardian and the birth parents.

There are only 3 things you cannot do with an SGO that you can with adoption.

1. Change the childs name.
2. Go abroad for more than 12 weeks
3. Apply to adopt the child.

In our experience you really have no support as an SGO family as SS hand over the child and literally walk away. This has been devastating to our family, but could also have been in an adoption scenario too.

As your niece will live with you for a year first you will have time to work out if she will need ongoing support so fostering first will go in your favour.

SGO really does give a child permanence without severing ties to their birth family - and for your niece only you know how damaging this may or may not be. Contact for our nephew with his birth family has been positive and adoption could not have given him that.

You can still have ongoing contact with birth parents after adoption if you think it is a positive thing for your child . Adoption doesnt rule that out.
We are foster carers and adoptors and we still see birth parents of our adopted child once a year.
Our long term fc has been with us over 10 yrs and sees his mother 3 times a yr. Both children have v complex medical , physical and learning needs and need care round the clock.
I just wanted to add that we get no real support from soc ser with our foster child other than meetings and bureaucracy. We get no support with respite provision despite fighting for it and have to get on with it to a large degree.
Our adopted child is now eligible for local services as he is legally our child . So it is not always true that fostering / sgo means more support than adoption . We have found the opposite to be the case because our fc comes from a local auth that are frankly rubbish.
So food for thought there. Personally i would always take adoption over sgo and in fact we have consistently refused an sgo for our fc and continue to hold out for adoption ( he is not a family member . He is in a strange legal position ).
Not that a child on sgo is not as much a family member as any other child but for me i like the full parental control adoption brings .

Brilliant post @flapjackfairy

OP I am sure you are already thinking in terms of best interest for the child, of course. Hopefully, social services will be able to explain how they interpret these terms differently.

The thing that would worry me personally would be if the child perceives any difference between herself and any subsequent children you have if she is not adopted. If she will call you mum and dad and perceive herself as your child will an SGO or long-term fostering make a difference to that from her perception?

I am not related to my adopted son biologically, he will always have a birth mother and father; and one day may see then again, if he chooses. Personally, I hope he will one day (he is 7, so not for now).

I would like to think children cared for by extended family have all the same protections as those cared for by those of us not biologically related. It seems the perimeters of what these terms mean is quite 'flexible' or at least what they mean in reality.

Unless there is a real benefit to a child not to be adopted, I would choose the route that leads to it (e.g. if SGO, does it mean you cannot later adopt?).

I don't understand why children who are biologically related to people who care for them are not adopted unless birth parents will continue to be involved. Does anyone have experience of continued parental involvement being a good thing?

Anyway, I've only had experience of adoption, with an existing birth child, and four years in, it is going well.

So I wish you all the very best, whatever you choose to do/are allowed to do.

Thank you for your posts flapjackfairy and italiangreyhound- both are really helpful points of view.

Like you say @Italiangreyhound , we worry she will see herself as unequal to any subsequent biological children. This wouldn't be so much of an issue if she continues to see her birth parents regularly, but this is going to be very unlikely due to their lifestyle. Hearing details of her past will be difficult enough without feeling isolated in other ways too.

I'm not sure if you can 'upgrade' an SGO to an adoption order, but it's definitely something we could look into.

You can’t upgrade an sgo to an adoption. If they consider adoption to be a viable option for her they will also consider other adoptive placements. An SGO is for family members and is considered a better option than adoption BECAUSE of the biological connection. The SGo assessment has a section for the assessor to consider other orders and usually to justify approval for an SGO it will explain why adoption is not appropriate here.
If birth mother or father is your sibling or your partner’s sibljng and that person remains involved in your life or her life then the court will want the child to have a clarity about who is who in her life. You can apply to change her name if, for example, there are risks to her safety. You can also apply to take her abroad if your family move.
We have lots of cases where the birth parent has regular contact and input when the child is under sgo, usually supervised by the sgo applicant. Lots of SGOs are granted to family members when a child is older and has an established attachment to the birth parents. Contact recommendations are made by the sgo assessor but approved by a judge so your wishes will be taken into account. They are supposed to prioritise the needs of the child so if the parents are a danger or there isn’t an attachment to them then contact can be very limited.

"I'm not sure if you can 'upgrade' an SGO to an adoption order, but it's definitely something we could look into." That's what I meant about avoiding an SGO of you cannot 'upgrade'. Not that one I'd better but one is different to the other.

It is unlikely for us that one of our son's birth parents will line until he is an adult so I know what you may mean about life style.

@theyoniwayisnorthwards are you saying you cannot adopt of there is a biological connection?

What's the benefit of an SGO for children unlikely to see their birth parent/a?

Thanks, just curious, we are not in that position, so I am just interested, feel free not to reply.

Notmyname......SS should be paying your legal fees. The solicitor has a duty of care to go through all the options with you, they can explain in more detail why some things are or are not possible.
We used our own solicitor who billed the childs LA directly for his work (it is a capped amount be aware). It did give us reassurance that we knew legally what we were getting ourselves into.

Sorry I've only just come back to the thread. I think I wasn't very clear and I've caused people to misunderstand what I meant by an sgo retaining the link to the birth parent. It's not anything to do with contact it's to do with their retaining PR and the relationship between them and the children remaining recognised by law. Even if they never see the child that link remains. This is considered positive by the courts for a number of reasons and is one reason sgo is favoured over adoption.
Adoption means a parent no longer has pr and legally the child has no relationship with them. It is a hugely intrusive draconian step and the court is very reluctant to do this unless absolutely necessary. So put simply you won't get an adoption order if an Sgo will suffice. I'd be really interested to hear of recent (post 2013) cases where someone has adopted a child where an sgo would have met need-I don't think there are any

@wherethewildthingis you sound like you know your stuff- have you been through something similar?

While I appreciate that both adoption and an SGO would bring a sense of permanence to my niece, and so both are great options, I can't see the logic in BP retaining power over her (as with an SGO) when they have made no effort at all so far. Then again, I appreciate I'm seeing this from an emotional rather than legal perspective.