Changing first name

[mollymollymoo]

Hi
It's looking really likely that we've been matched with a little girl - very excited! However - her current name is so identifying and ridiculous that even our social worker has said they can work with us to change it.
She'll be nearly 2 when she comes home.

Does anyone have any experience of this, the practicalities etc?

This is our 2nd adoption and we would have been more than happy to keep her name otherwise.. but really it is awful and not fair on her to have to grow up with it!!

I am very new to all this but I am going to wade in a little (god help me). Claiming a child is really important to both the adopter and the adoptee.

One of ours is extremely anxious, when we return home from a car journey he needs to/has to/ is desperate to exclaim that the house he sees is his house. Car journeys do not equal 'fun' to him, they mean turbulence, another new home, absolute uncertainty. Car journeys are not fun for us either, we have to continuously reassure and keep repeating the members of our family (including pets) that he is going home to in 'our house', all whist keeping our driving safe! I'm not changing names, because right now there isn't a security risk, but if I had judged there to be one I would have. If there had been a security risk, it would possibly mean us leaving our home, everything that our eldest currently anchors onto for dear life.

But also, it is important to realise that the best parenting happens when parents see the love, reasurance, safety reflected back at them (Dan Hughs). It is extremely tough to parent when the love and care is not reciprocated back, or at least not obviously. Many adopters do have to face this, but claiming, through name change/adding or the many other ways we can 'claim' can assist this.

Adopters are at the serious sharp end of any decisions we make, we slip up, we have the consequences to bear. No decision is ever taken lightly, everything is thought through, and then throught through again, looking for that vital piece of misjudgement that might tip the ship. And we know that all eyes are on us, SW's, family, friends, nosey neighbours, teachers... so god forbid we don't get it right.

And to be honest, for me the education I have received from these forums, it is taken with so much more gravitas than any textbook. Here you have the real life case studies of all that have travelled before (some of the posters have decades of it), everyone learns and then passes on their findings to help others. Times change, systems and processes change, but we are extremely lucky to have such experienced adopters commenting and giving their real life knowledge to us newbies that are just tentatively treading the path.

Just to add, I am adding to their name, their identity. My kids need to know that they are a part of our family. And that this family is theirs.

you are saying that you think it is an important part of claiming the child as your own and so changing the name even if there isn't risk is ok and understandable, I think? I understand your point, I think, but let me know if I got that wrong. You've got that wrong. I know of no children removed from their parents by the state and taken into care, and put up for adoption, where there is zero risk. I know lots of adopters who weigh up, and live with that risk. Name changing completely is sometimes necessary to lower the risk, and adding/altering/changing names has a beneficial (for the child, being claimed is good for children) side effect of being important in claiming. As you are not an adopter, then I do not expect you to appreciate the thought and care, and worry, and heartache, adopters put in to managing risk, and establishing claiming a child. As someone who has not said they're an adoptee, I do not expect you to appreciate how important it can be for a child to feel claimed, and fit in with their family, and be protected from risk. What is your interest and investment in this topic?

In general, pompously arguing from a theoretical stance with those who live and breathe the risk and real life angst, and are doing their best, may not be the best way to push a point, if you are genuine. Some of us live this, it's not an interesting topic it's our families, our children, our lives.

What is your interest in adoption?

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/3404593-Strongly-dislike-DDs-name-and-I-want-to-change-it-Am-I-horrible?trending=1

Interesting . I wonder why no one has said that she can’t change her daughter’s name because it’s her identity ?

" I know of no children removed from their parents by the state and taken into care, and put up for adoption, where there is zero risk."

thomassmuggit I was just thinking something similar actually, or rather that we just don't know what the risk is. etc.

Risk is one of those things that changes with claiming, I think, like acceptable care. Things that are ok for other people's children, may well be not good enough for my child. And that is why professionals accept things for children in care they'd never accept for their own children.

thomas you don't know what my experience is. I am only really interested in discussing the issues of identity, psychological impact, how to lessen the impact, because I think discussion will lead to greater understanding of the issues which would ultimately help children. I am not interested in personal comments, assumptions about motivations and experience, accusations of not posting in good faith, all of which I see as bullying and red flags and closing down real discussion.

I know of no children removed from their parents by the state and taken into care, and put up for adoption, where there is zero risk we are told by social workers (we have been told on this forum more than once) that instances of real risk which require name changing or no direct contact are rare.

When things go wrong in adoptions, it is the social workers, the other professionals and the court which have to deal with the fallout and so their professional opinions about identity and potential long term psychological impact are relevant.

You can add "adoptee" to my last paragraph too.

I don't want to be part of this discussion any more and it is clear that my input isn't valued, so I am only going to post if anything is directly aimed at me. Would be grateful if you could leave me out of any future posts so I don't have to post at all. Thanks.

Best of luck everyone.

"we have been told on this forum more than once) that instances of real risk which require name changing or no direct contact are rare"

How can I put this... a) I don't believe that social workers always know what risks there are and b) I don't believe social workers are truthful about what risks exist. And c) I think direct contact with birth parents for young children could be far more psychologically dangerois than beneficial in many cases.

One can look back on a situation where nothing bad happened and say, see no risk. But at the start one did not know that this would happen and so a proper risk assessment would say 'there may be a risk'.

Also, since social workers do not necessarily share 'that' risk it may be easier for them to minimise it, especially of they think it will help the child or help them or make things easier etc.

When things go wrong in adoptions, it is not the social workers, the other professionals and the court which have to deal with the fallout, it is the adoptive parents and children who have to deal with it!

Professionals may be on the scene (temporarily) or at the end of a phone, help may come eventually, or help may not come at all.

We have had lots of help. We have been lucky. Others get very little or any help.

Iff birth family traced a child and made trouble, professionals would be involved but whatever efforts they made the impact would be on the child and family.

The psychological impact on children coming from neglectful or abusive families is most likely made up of being exposed to drugs or alcohol in vitro, and\or problematic or chaotoc parentimh in some cases in early years,and\or exposure to random people who present risk in some cases, and\or exposure to ongoing drug or alcohol misuse,and\or mental health issues inherited or exposure to parents who suffer ( and I have OCD so I am not throwing mud around I am being honest), and the trauma of removal from birth family, the trauma of being in a new foster family for some multiple foster families, and then the eventual experience of joining a family by adoption.

If one of the things that happens is your first name is changed I really want to know how anyone accesses how much impact that name change has on all the other loss and trauma a child who joins a family by adoption might have had.

They lose parents, extended family, home, foster family etc.

Yes, some might say the loss of a name is significant. But I am just not sure how we could empirically know how much loss is down to a name change. Adopters can tell us. How can an individual even know?

I'm all for research. But with a system on it's knees, who will fund it?

I personally find the argument that name chaining has potential long term psychological impact, against that back drop, very hard to swallow.

I do believe little things matter, even a hair cut can be upsettong for a child, so yes, do all we can to keep things safe for kids. We asked our foster family what fabric detergent they used, we kept routine, etc etc. But if there is a risk it needs to be taken seriously.

Again' for the record, we kept our son's name. We accessed the situation as safe.

.. a) I don't believe that social workers always know what risks there are and b) I don't believe social workers are truthful about what risks exist.

Is there a general consensus in the group that this is true, and does it also apply at the stage when social workers are removing children?

How can I put this... a) I don't believe that social workers always know what risks there are and b) I don't believe social workers are truthful about what risks exist. And c) I think direct contact with birth parents for young children could be far more psychologically dangerois than beneficial in many cases. I think it is extremely dangerous for you to be ignoring professional advice, sorry.

The psychological impact on children coming from neglectful or abusive families...I personally find the argument that name chaining has potential long term psychological impact, against that back drop, very hard to swallow I think you are missing the point here. Latest thinking tells us that with the right help most children would be able to overcome the abuse and neglect and change of carers in their early life. This is not relevant to whether a name should be changed or not.

Offredalba
".. a) I don't believe that social workers always know what risks there are and b) I don't believe social workers are truthful about what risks exist."

"Is there a general consensus in the group that this is true, and does it also apply at the stage when social workers are removing children?"

It's my personal opinion based on what I know and based on what others have said. For example we found out something that had happened before our son was born, quite by chance, after placement. The social worker knew. I do not think it was kept from us on purpose but it did indicate something worrying in his family which we were not aware of.

I've heard something else similar from another person.

I think it would be wrong to expect social workers to know the whole story, they are not mind readers. Our son's birth mum said she stayed off the drink when pregnant. We don't know, I expect the social worker would have said she said she didn't drink in pregnancy. But at the end of the day who knows. I was pregnant once, I didn't drink anything other than a glass of wine once or twice and felt very guilty! But no one knows for sure that that is true except me!

Does it also apply at the stage of removing, I guess it must. My son's parents had people in their home. People who might not have been good around young kids. So social workers would have only know about this if and when it came to light. They may not have known the full story. I am not saying they are purposely leaving out big chunks of the story, but I also wonder if that does/or did happen sometimes too.

I'm not suggesting social workers make stuff up! I'm saying facts may be left out because they are not known, or because they are thought insignificant, or forgotten or not recorded properly or perhaps because sometimes it seems best not to include them. But I will never know the motivation and so I am not suggesting a negative motivation but just that I know for a fact not all facts come to light initially.

Bright you said not to tag you in, so I did not. But you are back so I am going to address what you said.

"I think it is extremely dangerous for you to be ignoring professional advice, sorry."

You do not need to be sorry for your feelings.

I have not ignored any such advice. At no point have our son's birth parents agreed to meet with us, let alone suggested they meet with their and our son.

Were this ever on the cards I would certainly look at professional advice but the decision while my son is a child would be mine (and I would talk to him too to see how he felt about it all since he is now of an age where he could understand more).

"Latest thinking tells us that with the right help most children would be able to overcome the abuse and neglect and change of carers in their early life..."

How exactly?

So children can overcome all of that, actual abuse, including drug abuse in vitro and perhaps brain damage caused in young life. I do not think it is possible to make it not so, maybe with the right therapeutic parenting it is possible to minimize it. Who do you think it doing that, professionals? It's the parents doing it, with input from professionals. You see we do listen to the them. I've had more input (I think) than a lot of people, because I have been very lucky.

So you can overcome all that, but not the change of a name. Sorry but I am afraid I do not believe that.

You said not to engage you so feel free to totally ignore me, but no I do not buy that and while I am dealing with the ongoing result of my son's early life, removal and adoption I will do my own research and make my own decisions, just like any other parent.

You've said that people do not value your contributions here and I would say that it is your tone that the professionals know best that grates.

It is not necessarily you brightsunshineatlast who are at fault here but you are failing to see that we are living this. Of course we will take into consideration professional advice. But ultimately we must bear the brunt of whatever happened and what we choose to do in parenting.

IMHO those 'professionals' currently saying one thing are the new generation of professionals who in the past said 'change the name' 'don't talk about the birth family', and also of the professionals who sent children over seas for new lives in Canada or persuaded single mums to give up their children because it was best for them.

Anyway, I'm out for a bit now because this all makes me very cross and I've got things to do.

I do not doubt for a moment your sincerity bright, I do not think you are here for any nefarious purposes. I think you are a crusader for what you think is right, fine, so am I.

We had fabulous social workers, a very good experience, and no real big surprises. We are four and a half years down the line and things are good. But we still need help, still get help and he buck stops with ds until he is 18.

and the buck stops with us until ds is 18.

Thanks Italian. I accept that it's your opinion and appreciate your sharing. I just wonder how many here agree with it.
We have a system of adoption that requires trust in social workers to support families in crisis, identify when children need to be removed, approve parents as adopters and finally complete adoptions. Do people feel that they are only untrustworthy at the last bit?
I ask genuinely. I don't know the answer.
As a society, we are all responsible for making sure that our vulnerable children get the best possible outcomes, whether or not we are connected to adoption in some way. We are all responsible for electing those who shape and oversee social policies.

I, sadly, know from personal experiences that sometimes failures happen, at all stages. We recognise that.

Offredalba "We have a system of adoption that requires trust in social workers to support families in crisis, identify when children need to be removed, approve parents as adopters and finally complete adoptions. Do people feel that they are only untrustworthy at the last bit?"

Haha I knew this was behind your question and was coming on to answer it!

Yes, as much as it is ever possible to know. And I am laughing at you asking not at the tragic circumstances, which are terrible!

As much as possible, I trust social workers to spot neglect and abuse and to work out what to do.

Why?

Because spotting and identifying what is there is much easier than pontificating on risks when there may or may not be viable or visible 'evidence'.

I think we could all say it is easier to prove that something did happen than that it didn't happen.

E.g. my husband arrives home with lipstick on his collar and a wiff of exotic perfume about him.

If I trail him and find he is visiting the holiday in with his secretary for nights away I've got some evidence he is unfaithful but if I never find anything I have no evidence he is faithful. As a person I manage any risks. (My hubby doesn't have a secretary, our town doesn't have a holiday inn and I'm not worried!)

But my point is it is harder to make a case from lack of evidence than from the existence of evidence. Future risk is pretty much exclusively based on current info, possible risk etc, and opinions, unless it is based on medical prognosis.

For the record I do not trust any professional completely! I got a second opinion on my fertility status (after dd was born). The second opinion was the same as the first. Bit I am glad I checked.

When ds joined us the school officials professional opinion was he should be full time at school from age 4 within weeks of joining us. I said no, and he had a graduated start later in the year. When it was time to start school I did get professional adoption related advice, and I did take it.

I think adopters do listen to a lot of advice and share it.

I had fabulous social workers that I, for the most part, trusted. But I know that social workers do a very tough job and are over stretched so I am not surprised if things get missed off occasionally.

I hope that answerrs your question.

Our social worker was wonderful, so was our daughters. However, my daughters social worker informed us over and over than birth parents didn’t really grasp what losing a child meant and that they would accept and move on quickly. Zero risk etc etc based on that. When we met them, I was struck by how my instincts told me she was very wrong. Birth father did indeed understand what he had lost and he was understandably angry. I sensed that within 5minutes if meeting him. He has written each year for letterbox even though it must be very hard for him (both emotionally and in terms of communication- his girlfriend clearly writes his letters). I still shake my head at how she could have worked with them for months and yet got him so so wrong. I’m sure he will one day try to track my daughter down.

So, they were both wonderful. Both excellent at spotting risk to my daughter and were right to take her out of that situation. I wouldn’t say they were right about the risks after she was placed. If they cannot read birth parents feelings then how can they assess risk? So yes, I believe that the end of the process is the most risky.

brightsunshine it's not bullying to ask what your interest in the topic is. The context of this discussion is very different as to who we identify with in the adoption triangle. As I said, discussing something "in theory" about other people's children is always going to be different to those discussing practically about their own children.

The only time external services step in to adoptions is when the adoptive parents have already tried everything. The people who do most management of risk, and "picking up of pieces" are adoptive parents. Unfortunately, your posts appear quite ignorant of the life of adoptive families.

What's an interesting topic for you is our lives.

Your misinterpretation of my "sorry" earlier on is interesting, in terms of social understanding. Certainly, your posts appear over invested in thinking badly of a group of people you have no obvious connection to the lives of. Why are you so unwilling to state your interest in adoption? It's a strange discussion to enter as an outsider to the triangle.

Do people feel that they are only untrustworthy at the last bit?

I think it’s not so much that individuals are untrustworthy but more there are huge failings in the system.

I believe that mistakes are sometimes made at all stages of the process, because of a lack of evidence based , child centred practice.

I think that some children are removed when they could have stayed with more of the right support at the right time.

I know that many children are permanently damaged (emotionally and physically ) or even killed because they were not removed when they should have been.

I think that some people are approved to adopt or foster whoshouldn’t be , and vice versa.

I think that many placements break down because of lack of the right kind of support at the right time.

BIL & SIL adopted at 21 months. It was agreed with SW his name should be changed. They mixed his new name with his old one, saying old name first then 2nd. After a while they swapped the order around, and finally dropped the old name. It worked with no issues.

Totally agree with Boomchicawowow and Kr1stina about mistakes in the system.

My trusting of social workers that generally are able to spot abuse etc doesn't mean I think that mistakes are never made. I am sure some mistakes are made.