Information on specialist assessments withheld - advice needed

[ClArabelle67]

Hello

Has anyone had experience of adoption and finding out later that specialist assessments and diagnosis were withheld?

Children's convention
If you’re talking about the UN Convention on the Rights of the child, yes it’s far rewatching and covers a lot of areas but I very much doubt it would give a grandparent the right to information about an adopted child or any say in their medical treatment or upbringing.

One can still pursue support after adoption, Adoption Support Fund for children with life time conditions , Fund is ringfenced at £5000pa with the exceptions of children with life time conditions including FAS & FASD ., think its around max of £50,000 dependant on severity Not too say all will contest as too severity and requirement (all about cost NOT THE CHILD). Best too read Adoption support fund at www.first4adoption.org , careful how you read as needless too say is in small print. Can apply any time no 3 year limit as can issues may occur many years after adoption.

This apply' s too all children Adoption, Special Guardian's, and Kinship carer's So yes Grandparents are included , the term leaving care also applies even if the child has only been in care for ONE DAY. is for children age 0 too 25., 25 if they are on a Educational Health care plan.
In some cases, SGO , Kinship care , foster too adopt, fostering too adoption. Child should be referred too back too LA's SS and leaving care transition services at the age of 15.5yrs. At 18 there is no legal parental responsibility's so the become estranged young adults in some situations. Not very nice but a reality. and fact. So its best not too forget and start early for best outcome.

I think we’re talking at cross purposes, the OPs grandchild was adopted, she thinks the child’s parents don’t know about previous diagnosis and wants to pass info to them and to find out what therapies are in place. Others here, myself included, are saying that goes beyond what is appropriate when the child has been adopted and someone else now has parental responsibility for him/her.

QUITE aware , ONE HAS TOO EXPLORE AVENUES. may be is a way, have much empathy, have adopted 9 children and SGO's know all too well of undisclosed issue's , also at age 18 in some situation's legal responsibility transfers to Birth parents like it or not , all too late. Hence effects education, and permanent stability see www.standalone students. or google.

I’m not aware of situations where responsibilities pass back to birth parents at 18, can you give examples please?

Can read Estranged Students, stand alone students prime examples.
Court applications of power of attorney capacity transition too adults .
list can go on. In this situation at the moment. But are fortunate in agreement with all party's., hence the need for knowing as much medical history as possible and early.

Unless there are issues with mental capacity, a child reaches the age of capacity at 18 and no one has legal responsibility for them, power of attorney isn’t an automatic process it has to be applied for with the approval of the person needing support, the same with appointeeship for benefits. I can’t think of a single occasion when legal rights or powers transfer from one adult to another without a clear process of assessment.

The situations you describe (power of attorney) have a clear process which presumably the adoptive parents would be involved in. Even so, this isn’t the situation the OP is talking about - the child is still a child and has been adopted, the birth family have no continuing legal rights or responsibility in relation to the child. And yes I know morally, relationally etc folk may feel differently.

I think we would all agree that its unacceptable for LAs to withold information, that is now the adopers battle to fight.
If in this case, the adopters havent been told that the child has autism, then I'm sure they will soon work out for themselves there is something that needs investigating.
But we don't actually know that the adopters haven't been told. If the LA were intent on covering up, I find it really hard to believe they would admit to fabricating letters from the adopters.
The blunt fact is that adoption severs the legal tie with the birth family. The OP seems to think that letterbox will give her the opportunity to have some sort of role in the children's care. She has overstepped boundaries by contacting the GP.
As I have said before we have direct contact with dad. I facilitated this because my son was much older at adoption and had a positive relationship with dad. I have gone way beyond what most adopters do, but I would not share medical or theraputic information.
On two occasions dad has overstepped boundaries, it didnt help relationships at all, including with my son.

@fasparent the stand alone students website is about student finance, I don't understand your point with this

I’m not aware of situations where responsibilities pass back to birth parents at 18, can you give examples please? I am personally aware of responsibility passing back to bio parents before 18 in cases of disruption. Also, I am not sure about now, but back in the day of student grants, parents' income had to be assessed as part of grant application and if the parents were adoptive parents and estranged, then arrangements could be made to view bio parent as parent and for them to be assessed instead.

In real life things can get less clear cut in terms of parental responsibility when adoptions don't work out, ime, though I have never known personally an AO to be overturned in these circumstances, more that different people are treated as having PR.

But I am not sure any of this is the point, as the OP wanted to make sure that info had been passed on to and really hasn't indicated that she was crossing lines, or demanding rights, or having unrealistic expectations. I think a couple of posters have been reading too much into things. And it really depends on how the adopters in this particular situation view things.

At 18 evaluation on parental interest under Mental capacity act depends on Legal judgment and law. Lots depends on choices and assessment's and birthparents interest, direct kinships and agreement's, dependant on situation, court required declaration of this and parents birth certificates. They are now Adults , Yes is about finance also stability and evaluation on entry too education are assessed on this , many are refused some uni's are supportive and can provide pastural care. For having children young adults with lifetime needs its akin too starting Adoption/SGO process all over again.
Fortunate like TED we have a level of normality. But have too protect young person's chosen lifestyle , finances / benefits and Trust's too the best degree possible, as we will not be around for ever.

Its not really about Adoption but Transition's too Adult care (applies too all in this category) and Services, be it education/care and/or benefits, if a child has too go too residential care the more protection will be needed. Never would have foreseen this situation but is as it is courts will decide., but are confident of a positive out come

Like some have stated if we were aware of undisclosed medical issues at placement we would have and could have, started correct interventions and perhaps prevented or lessons some secondary issues rather fining out via legal too the Accidental findings of the true extent of causes and conditions , reasons courts are requesting all details. Complicated too say the least.
Is of the courts procedure and interest not our's would have proffered the simplest of solutions.

Given that the GP practice was provided with the information I find it inconceivable that the GP practice would sit on it and not contact the parents to let them know what had been provided. Plus, if letterbox letters advise or are to advise them of this then the adopters have this information. Beyond that how the AP deal with that information, whether they ignore it or act on it, is a matter for them and, possibly, in extreme cases, the state, through normal social work intervention which would apply to any family situation not just an adoptive one.

@jellycat, so if you were in our situation and discovered that the LA had withheld that information diagnostics) and then a birth family member gave you it, you’d feel they were pushing the boundaries? And you think every adopter would feel that way. If it was me I would a) be furious with the LA and b) gather as much info as possible from whatever sources to ensure the child’s best interests remained at the centre of any activity. Children are not possessions.

I have spoken to a barrister. I have two options, one is judicial review of the LA and the other is to apply for a contact order. Both of these routes would cause stress to the adopters. I’ve no desire to put them under any stress. And @Ted27, I have proof the diagnostics were not passed on. I never suggested adopters were stupid. As I’m clear you know, autism is a spectrum. They’ve not been told the birth mother has a diagnosis and they’ve not been my grandson has been diagnosed. From their letters it’s obvious they don’t know, or have not cottoned on. They think he’s quirky, they think it’s amusing when he repeats behaviours in nonappropriate environments, they’re probably under the ( false) impression that they suffered significant harm. I am not ‘pushing’ any boundaries with them. I gave up my legal rights to my grandchildren for very personal reasons which we’re based on their best interests. This does not mean I will not advocate for their rights, which includes appropriate, commended therapy. If the adopters see that as interfering or pushing the boundaries then there is nothing I can do about that. That’s there karma, not mine.

@CIArabelle67 I'm glad you've taken legal advice. My first post to you was to tread carefully and get legal advice.
I feel the best way for you to achieve what you want is to challenge the LA. With my adopter hat on, contacting the GP does feel like boundary pushing. But, not being the adopter in question, I can understand why you did. Your issue really is with the LA. I really do hope that you get the answers you want

@ciarabella67 as an adopter it would depend on when you gave the information to the GP as to how I'd feel about it. I would only have a problem if it was after the order was granted. Mostly because I'd want to know how my GP got it and would be concerned about confidentiality, etc.

When it comes to letterbox contact, it's a balancing act. I'm aware that BF have strong feelings with regard to having their child taken away so irrevocably and that they should all be living together. To my mind there is no point including some of the challenges my child faces for the following reasons:

1)it would worry/upset them and there is nothing they can do about it
2) I am respecting my child's privacy- I won't share anything I wouldn't share with a casual acquaintance.
3) I'm writing one letter a year and it's impossible to get across some information that's happened without getting bogged down in things that potentially go against the policy we have to follow. I don't want the letter to be delayed or have to be substantially rewritten because the letterbox coordinator has an issue with it.
4) I don't want the contents to be so specific that over time someone could work out where we live, etc

so if you were in our situation and discovered that the LA had withheld that information diagnostics) and then a birth family member gave you it, you’d feel they were pushing the boundaries?

In all honesty, yes I would. Especially if they contacted my GP because that means they would have had to dig about to find me and that someone has possibly breached my confidentiality in confirming my GP. It also means they have a good idea of where I live.

Let me explain it this way. My DD has additional needs, mainly attributable to early trauma with a side order of dyslexia. When I do letterbox I’ll talk about her happy, funny personality, her being quite quirky and I’ll talk about her academics etc and will say for example she’s a bit behind but gaining ground - which is true to some extent.

I don’t say she’s being treated for x, y and z because a) it’s absolutely none of her birth mums business, my DD deserves a degree of privacy; b) I don’t want to rub her nose in the harm her behaviour caused my DD; c) I want my DD when she looks back on those letters to see how positively we regard her challenges. I’m living with my child every single day, I’m adjusting my diary to accommodate appointments with professionals, I’m negotiating with her school. I don’t need to explain that to anyone and her birth family don’t get to know all of that. Apart from anything else I literally don’t care whether they think I’m caring for her properly or not, given I’m dealing with the fall out of their poor care for her.

If birth mum thinks I don’t know my child has significant additional needs that’s her business, I’d consider it a massive boundary breach for her to go out with the lines of communication established via SW. Your issue is with the local authority, by all means request a judicial review - if you think that would cause the adopters stress let me tell you nothing would be more stressful for me than finding my children’s birth family had been in direct contact with my GP.

And honestly, if your grandchildren have been removed permanently, they’ve experienced significant harm given that’s the threshold for starting child protection processes, if there was no significant harm they wouldn’t have been removed.

I know that all sounds quite hard - I actually have a very positive view of my children’s BM, I know fully the challenges she faced and she did her best. I will support them to have a relationship with her when the time is right but she and her family have no part to play in my care of them.

That’s there karma, not mine.

You say that like the adopters have done something wrong?

OP really you should do what you think is the best way of getting the information to the adopters about the children's past.

There is nothing wrong with communicating with a GP about a child, it happens all the time, and any social workers reading this thread will be aware of that. Yes, it is stressful for the parent. But if it is being done in the best interest of the child, then it is appropriate, and that would be a social worker's advice, I am sure. A GP is likely to have the ability to filter so it isn't a huge intrusion. Yes, if it is done maliciously or thoughtlessly it will cause unnecessary stress, so it is for you also to think carefully and use your best judgement whether you are acting in the best interest of the child.

It is not so much it is the adopter's karma, it is more that the adopter's feelings are for the adopter to deal with themselves. The adopters are adults. Your concern is the children.

Re the contact order, apparently the courts will not push it if the adopters cannot cope with it as that would not be in the best interest of the child, so you can rely on the courts' discretion, you don't need to be worried about adopters, just the interest of the child.

Re the judicial review, that would have merit but presumably any effect would not be in time to help the children.

I do also think that good points have been made about the discretion adopters use when writing letterbox, and you need to take that into consideration when considering what to do.

But bottom line here is that you know the children, and you should have a fairly good idea of what you truly believe is going to be in their best long term interest, assuming that you are solely interested in their best interest, and that is what you need to focus on, in my opinion.

OP, just one other thing - autism and trauma can present in a very similar way in young children, and the distinction is important as it will affect interventions and prognosis. You may well already be more than aware of this and it may have come up in the specialist assessments.

@jellycatspyjamas, the pre plo is is triggered by risk of significant harm. This was the LAs position due to my daughter’s diagnosis. The children were considered to be thriving in her care. She (eventually) agreed to the adoption because her personal circumstances. Any ‘trauma’ was caused by the separation from her and then later by the separation from me. My granddaughter incurred an internal injury while In foster care. I do understand where you are coming from in terms of your own experience, but please try to be a little bit more objective. There is plenty of research to show that it is the post climbing review of services, coupled with dwindling resources that have created a risk adverse climate where LAs seek ICOs without having provided adequate support and interventions.
With regard to knowing the GPS details, I have those because I was erroneously sent a copy of the adoption medical notes, so no, I did not go sniffing around. I would not dream of seeking out their specific whereabouts. In fact I am so concerned about the possible impact of bumping Into them, ( for all involved), I avoid both the borough in which the GP is and the neighbouring borough, as this is where the adoption order was finally made. I also avoid any places during school holidays where there is even the remotest possibility they might be.

@arabianelephantclock, yes I’m aware the two things can have overlapping behaviours. And certainly the situation was complicated by the separation from their BM. I’m a qualified SEN assessor, and having already raised one autistic child I was very aware of what to look out for. The specialists were in agreement with me.

I understand what everyone is saying here about not sharing information with BM/BFs, especially if that therapy is in relation to any harm/trauma for which they were ultimately responsible. Why should you tell them? It’s none of their business, you are picking up and dealing with their failures. But this situation is not about those things, this is about a genetic condition that was diagnosed and where Both planned and continuing interventions were in place and the LA deliberately excluded this information.