Calling all adopters and foster parents and would be adopters and foster parents

[Lancsmama]

Hi,
Thanks for reading this. I am a Social Work Masters student interested in the reasons why people choose to foster rather than adopt and vice versa. I am particularly interested in the role finance plays in decision making (particularly that foster carers are paid to look after the children in their care whilst adopters are not). I am thinking about doing some primary research in this area and wanted to know from those who have been through it whether they feel finance is an issue at all and therefore whether it is worth further research? I am also keen to hear whether those who have adopted think an adoption allowance should be paid. Would be grateful to hear your thoughts and whether you would be willing to be involved in the research, which would be confidential and could be done by phone or in person in the North West of England. I am also interested in hearing from people who are currently debating whether to foster or adopt.
Many thanks all, look forward to hearing from you.

Adoption and fostering are apples and oranges. The difference is not "one lot gets paid." I'd suggest strongly that you get a much better idea about the differences.

Adopters can get adoption allowances, and can be "paid". Foster carers are never the child's parents, adopters are.

Thanks for your feedback thomassmuggit, I do appreciate the differences between adoption and fostering, sorry if that wasn't clear. I'd be interested in any information or sources of information on payment to adopters as this isn't something I've heard about at this, very preliminary, stage of my exploration of the subject.

Your OP doesn't sound like you really understand the difference.

Adoption was a way of expanding our family permanently. Fostering (although it can be long term) didn't offer that permancy and presented long term involvement from social services. In the end we were offered a foster to adopt placement. The money had no bearing on our decision to accept. The child bring a good match with our family was the reason we accepted. In fact it felt weird being paid to look after a child my husband and I considered our own. The fostering period was an anxious time because we knew we had no parental rights and should the birth families circumstances change our baby could be returned to them. For my family fostering meant living with the fear that a child you have grown to love and want to be part of your family could be taken away from you. We all wanted it to be over as soon as possible despite being paid.

Throughout our adoption process there was no mention at all of an adoption allowance or any financial help being available so we planned to meet all of the costs and saved accordingly. At linking stage we were told about what was a pretty generous package of financial support due to some of the issues for our children and have in fact been given an adoption allowance.

Finance didn’t play a part in our decision making at all but having some financial support has allowed us to make some decisions about our working lives which will benefit the children and wouldn’t have been possible otherwise. I know we’re super fortunate in that.

Cassie9 thanks so much for taking the time to respond, it is really interesting and helpful to hear your perspective. I appreciate how stressful that period of fostering is for families fostering to adopt and I hope that your adoption is now complete. Thank you too for your insight into how it felt to receive payments in that situation, that is really useful for me and I am grateful to you sharing for that.

Jellycatspyjamas, thank you so much for your message, that is really good to hear. I am new to Mumsnet, I don't know if there is any kind of private message facility but if there is would you be willing to talk to me a bit more on a private message? I am very interested to understand more about adoption allowances and how and where they are applied as I am not sure practice is consistent across areas and this is a potential area of research for me. If not, that's absolutely fine, please don't feel pressured.

We are hoping to adopt. I love that foster care is there (in our county, all children are looked after this way) - and, fair play to people who do that.

Not for us though - we are looking for a new permanent family member.

I certainly think it's an important area, worthy of research. I do agree with Thomas that FC and Adoption need to be treated completely separately- finances are very, very rarely going to be the reason someone chooses one over the other.

I suspect the adoption area may be the less studied and the more fruitful. Some random thoughts for areas of investigation are:

-To what extent is adoption a middle class pursuit? I suspect finance and other issues become quite big barriers to very good parents adopting once you get below a certain income.

-How random is the allocation of adoption allowances? I would guess the answer is: very. Probably varying by LA and pushiness of adopters, rather than the factors it should vary by.

-A lot of money flows around the care system in relation to a LAC. Almost none (as a proportion) is used to support adopters. Although I imagine studies of pre and post adoption support needs have been done a lot before, though certainly not acted on (probably used as toilet paper in Conservative Central Office).

I'm North West based and would cheerfully contribute.

I'd be interested in any information or sources of information on payment to adopters as this isn't something I've heard about at this, very preliminary, stage of my exploration of the subject.

Does this mean that you don't yet know what funding is potentially available to adopters?

Finance should not in my view play any part in a decision about whether to foster or adopt.
Setting aside foster to adopt, fostering is a job. Its a very important job requiring highly skilled people, who should be treated as professionals and paid accordingly. I know a number of foster carers, they are very special people who love and nurture the children in their care and have hugely positive impacts on their lives, but its still a job.
Adoption is about legal permanence. I wanted to be a mum to one child, not mum/carer to many children passing through my care onto a different stage in their life.
I made significant changes to my life to be able to afford to raise a child without support. But like jellycats I was matched with a child with additional needs and was given a very generous adoption allowance and was able to make decisions about work which have been very important to both of us. I was at a forum of single adopters recently. I was the only one in receipt of adoption allowance. I was pretty stressed but they were all on their knees. I am a better parent for not having to bounce between full time work, therapists, school appointments etc. I have to fill in the endless bits of paper, to access support groups, to indulge in a bit of self care. He benefits by not having a totally frazzled mum, by getting my full attention in the evenings and weekends, and a lot of time in the school holidays. If I had to I would work full time but its better for both of us that I don't. My son was older at adoption, and I've ended up paying for things that he really should have received from professional services. As an example at 8 he could not run, throw, catch or kick a ball, his hand eye co-ordination was dreadfull and his motor skills poor. I paid for a personal trainer for three years to work on all of this with him. Now he's in the school basketball team. He should have had an OT.
The problem with adoption allowance is that there is no consistency across the country. Some local authorities are generous, some aren't. Budgets are squeezed. Its a bit of a lottery if you get it. Those of us who do shouldn't feel lucky. Its not a 'payment' for being a parent to my child. Personally I feel that the concept of adoption allowance needs reviewing. There should be a recognition that the vast majority of adopted children will have some level of addional need and they should all should have the right to some kind of fund or pot of money allocated to them at the time of adoption. It would be for the adopter to access it when they needed it, and they should be able to use it for therapies, or if necessary to replace lost income. Obviously there would need to be a suitable process to ensure the child's fund was not misused.

Thanks so much for your thoughtful responses, they are greatly appreciated.

I have met some amazing foster carers who i admire greatly and i have come across some who do it purely for the money.
Equally i know fabulous adoptive parents who really take the time to research the issuesetc and of others who pay lipservice to it alland stick to traditional parenting methods.
I don't know how you'd get anyone to be honest.

Equally i know fabulous adoptive parents who really take the time to research the issuesetc and of others who pay lipservice to it alland stick to traditional parenting methods.

I don't think 'traditional' parents are paying lip service. There will be as many parenting models in adoption as there are in non-adoptive parenting. There is a huge range in the needs of adopted children (and thus, in many cases, limits on what style of parenting will actually work). There will also be huge range in the level of skill and experience that adopters bring to bear. Not all parents are superb, but I suspect that the average skill level of adopters is higher than non-adopters.

I have met some amazing foster carers who i admire greatly and i have come across some who do it purely for the money.

DD2's FC certainly just saw it as a job- very different from most FCs I know. She'd looked after a lot of kids and was more detached, but she was very efficient and competent. I don't for a minute think she did it just for the money.

Adoption allowance in my experience varies greatly and even within the same LA. I have found that if some adopters shout loudly they get it when others in very similar or worse situations don't get it. It is also means tested and this angers me. My lo's, whilst I would not swap them for the world, are entitled to an adoption allowance because of their needs. Their difficulties are a direct result of the care system itself. However as the allowance is means tested against our income we will Likely never get it or not get it for a long time. It is reviewed annually. We have had to half our income as we are now living on one salary in order to meet the needs of our children but due to a lot of hard work on our part prior to these children joining our family we have considerable savings and no mortgage. Based on savings alone it will be many years before we would meet the threshold for claiming the adoption allowance. Our savings were meant to be our pension. We know that that pension pot will be pretty much eroded away by the time retirement comes because it will need to be used to meet the needs of our gorgeous children. Some say well that is what being a parent is about. Yes it is but it is very unlikely that birth children would have the same pull on us financially as our AD children. We would likely have been able to bring in closer to two salaries than one and we would not likely be paying out for a lot of therapies. It is a kick in the teeth that our hard work and foresight in financial planning is being dwindled away to meet needs caused by others, namely the care system. Payment of the adoption allowance would mean we would not be dipping into our savings for day to day living. Yes our savings would be used to supplement some aspects of life and provide some therapies but not simply to live from month to month. Put simply if the adoption allowance of paid to recognise the children's needs then it should not be means tested. This again is an example of how it does not pay to be financially prudent in our country.

I’ve pm’d you.

I am a foster Carer and chose to be a foster Carer initially with the view to support teenagers whom wouldn't be adopted but to give them a home love stability and help those who could not live with their parents for what ever reasons.

I gave up a good job to do this and therefore finances were important as I will had a mortgage to pay.

I have fostered a child who went on to be adopted and whilst with me I was asked several times from those around
Me and bm why I hadn't considered adopting firstly I have birth children and secondly there are lots of people out there who are desperate for children and I felt it would have been very selfish of me as I have had my own babies and for a short time had thought I had fertility problems so understand the need for a child.

I do feel for adopters I feel they are less supported and whilst there are those on here who have clearly took it on them selves to educate themselves and do their utter best for the children they care fore I feel that are unsupported and some not prepared or surprised as the traumatised children they have adopted .

Thanks so much for sharing your experiences and feelings about them, it is so useful to hear first hand from people. Thank you for taking the time.

Thought i would add an opinion as a fosteree.
I was fostered long term by the same family. They fostered hundreds and also worked full time. Part of the rationale was that it meant more kids could be fostered.
This was in the 80s when there was less financial incentive.

I'd say long term that for older children, the ones who are probably especially isolated and have some catching up to do in regards to 'feeling loved' and identity, should have adoption funded, perhaps in ways non financial , and i think till 23.

From my outdated experience people got very little except for social worker catch ups. I understand children in care get better access to schools. I dont know about adopted children. But I feel it should be more than that.

What is remarkable is that all the stats on homelessness drug abuse , and prostitution point to long term foster care being an indicator.
That's not to distract from the many great people who do it.
It's more a damning indictment of a society that doesn't care enough for it's isolated children, and to stop them slipping from the safety net.

I have many opinions on these but id probably break the word count!

On finance, there are a few things I think need addressing not necessarily adoption allowance but

• adoption pay. You are expected to have someone at home, not working for at least a year (and I was told under no circumstances would adoption happen without this). As a single person, that meant I had three months no income whatsoever, so relied on savings (which I had underestimated), help from parents and a 36 month interest free credit card. I didn't qualify for adoption allowance.

-court fees. Yes you can claim them back. I didn't receive a receipt from court and am having to prove to la that I paid to get the money back. This is ludicrous as it is impossible to apply for adoption order without sending the money.

• I was lucky as my employer viewed adoption appointments like maternity medical appointments. Others are nit so lucky and legally you are only entitled to five paid days off before placement.

We would happily adopt at least one more (we have got 2), if finances weren't an issue. We are now considering fostering. I doubt that finances are so rarely a reason. Children cost money and children with such difficult starts often cost even more. I would think there are quite a few people out there who just can't afford to adopt.

The relationships very much depend on people involved and circumstances. My children's sibs are in long-term care and their fc are like parents to them. The siblings say things like "I know they are not my parents, but I see them as my parents". So while the legal differences are significant, emotionally it can be very similar.

I would be happy to participate in research.

An adoption allowance should be paid to adopters until the final hearing and the child is officially adopted as before then SS have parental responsibility. Adoption allowance should continue for high needs children and potentially some sibling groups as typically one parent is unable to work for a long time, if ever etc, and this impacts financially in the family when people need higher level quality respite and child care etc.