what do you think adoption will look like in the future?

[Snazzygoldfish]

Just that really. I think open adoption will become much more common and adopters will become more like long term foster carers with ongoing contact with birth families facilitated wherever possible.

My suspicion is that one of the things preventing this now is that adoption is a cheap option for LA's compared to long term foster care.

Personally, I would be open to face to face contact but only on the condition that there were strict boundaries in place and whatever support was needed for all involved in the adoption triangle. This too would be costly in comparison with adoption as I know it. I'm aware things are different in different parts of the U.K.

I doubt it will be likely to be open adoption. From what I have observed on here and twitter people may not adopt if open adoption is the norm. The government are trying to recruit more adopters not lose them.

As a birth parent i do look at the American model of adoption and feel a pang. The problem is that there isn't enough support for anybody in the triangle.

Something needs to change though as letterbox is difficult for everybody and it seems its mismanaged.

Thanks for replying. Yes I agree about the lack of support for all involved, birth parents in particular. It's so sad because it could be so very different.

Yeah it's hard. Afteradoption closed in April and there has nothing else put in place for us. Our LA doesn't seem in a rush either.

Don't get me wrong if I was offered open contact I would snatch it up in a heartbeat.

I don’t see it moving to more open adoption and certainly not like long term foster care. There’s too much research that supports the need for permanence and security for children, long term fostering arrangements are far from ideal and I don’t think it’s in anyone’s interest to move adoption closer towards a fostering model.

I think the difference in the US is that adoption usually follows the child being relinquished - birth parents for whatever reason aren’t able to care for their child and willingly place them for adoption. That’s so far from the case in the UK where children have usually experienced extensive difficulties and removal has been an action of last resort. Maintaining contact with birth families who are often chaotic and may struggle is a very different prospect to contact with birth parents who happily acknowledge their child’s adopters.

If anything I think adoption will remain much the same for the foreseeable future possibly with adoptive parents having better access to a wider evidence base to inform their parenting. I’d love to see proper therapeutic support for birth parents post adoption to break the cycle of children being repeatedly removed but I don’t see there being money made available for it.

I think it will move to more open adoption too with more contact with birth family where appropriate. I do think this will lead to fewer adopters coming forward though.

Jellycats I think you've identified one of the big differences in that children are rarely relinquished here.
Though I think some of the reasons for relinquishing children are questionable and based in oppression in some US states the fact is the model leds itself to more open arrangements.

The Pause project has some success
www.pause.org.uk/ at breaking the cycle of repeated removals but I feel there needs to be more available to birth parents to stop the cycle and hopefully for some allow them to arrive at a place where they would be be in a position to look after a child.

Darkriver I always admire your stance as a birth parent with their children's best interests at heart.

I'd like to see improved support for all involved in adoption, and better quality resources (eg life story books) and attention paid to small details important to children, and better letterbox systems. All that would cost money though...

I find the problem with a lot of the good projects are that it's not rolled out nationwide due to again money. I can't afford to move to where the projects are as I would lose support circle as well.I am determined to beat the cycle which I failed to do the first time. Contact is a way for me to show the girls that I still care for them. Will I parent again? My answer changes daily.

However, letterbox is so hard and I have spoken to many BPs who feel unsupported and unheard around it. They don't know what to write, they fear there letters will be rejected etc. Even myself who is so commited to letterbox have been struggling with what I can say. There is also a sense that we should greatful for what we get.

I know contact is hard for the adopters as well.

Which is why I think it needs to change I just don't know how.

I completely agree with jellycatspyjamas.

I also agree we need more initiatives like pause.

I’m aware of Pause, but it’s currently only available in England and it’s not a model that will suit many women. There’s no doubt it’s a worthwhile programme but I think there needs to be a wider think about longer term, trauma informed support for women to work through both the loss of their child/children and the issues that made parenting such a struggle in the first place. In my professional practice I don’t know of one woman who has lost her children to adoption who hasn’t got an extensive trauma history of her own - that’s what we need to be attending to in my view.

I agree that much of the relinquishment State-side is driven by socio-economic factors, there still a huge amount of discrimination against women, a faith culture and stigma around termination which all play their part so no I’m not suggesting these mums are happy, but on some basic level there’s an element of (or the illusion of) choice. I’d be interested to see what that means for outcomes for birth mothers, ie whether the “choice” element improves or worsens mental health for birth mum post adoption loss.

There’s no doubt it’s a worthwhile programme but I think there needs to be a wider think about longer term, trauma informed support for women to work through both the loss of their child/children and the issues that made parenting such a struggle in the first place.

100% agree with you Jellycatpyjamas. I am very lucky that my budget allows private therapy. The court psychartrist said I would need 18 months of therapy to deal with my symptoms. Admittedly I think he was grossly underestimating. My brain isnt ready to cope.

Oh yes I'm with you all in the limitations of Pause, just giving it as an example.
I know adopters whose children's birth parents keep having more siblings and they can't take them on and worry about how and when to tell their children.
Ideally the support and interventions need to be in place immediately after the removal of a child for all birth parents, and really ideally for grandparents who need it.

I'm glad you can fund therapy Dark River and I hope it is helping to some degree.
I'm with you on the perception from some SW and adopters that birth parents should be grateful for what they get in terms of letterbox.

Jellycats is so right about the trauma most birth parents have been through to arrive at the point where they are unable to care for their child. Of course the child's needs have to be prioritised but some of these women and men would not be in the position of having children removed if they hadn't been let down by 'the system' at an earlier stage.

I'd be interested too Jellycats to see if the US birth mothers can more easily go on to parent and keep subsequent children if they manage to be in a more 'respectable' (not in my view but you know what I mean) or better financial position.
I feel like there is a lot of exploitation of these women and their situation in the US.

Northern Ireland pretty much has the direct contact stance for most adoptions doesn't it ?
Personally I think blanket open adoptions ( except where there is a significant risk to the adoptive family obviously where it is ruled out anyway ) are not a great idea because I feel the children have too much disruption to their new attachments by continually revisiting the past as it were.
I know that is an unpopular stance and people quote research to support open adoptions but I have drawn my conclusions from 15 yrs as a foster carer and as an adoptor who supports one direct contact a year for my adopted child as in his case there are good reasons for it.
So I guess that is the key. Each case should be judged on individual merits and where birth families are supportive good idea but otherwise the continual reopening of wounds for the kids involved is just too much imo.
And yes fewer people would even consider adoption under those circumstances.

I agree with you @flapjackfairy I think that as much as it hurts me that right now open contact would have been too upsetting for the girls and I don't want them to be unsettled. It doesn't mean I can't feel a pang or a wish that it was different.

I think my adoption support worker said out of the 50 families she worked with only one had Direct contact.

In Northern Ireland direct contact is very common and has been for the last ten years. It does not limit the number of adopters coming forward. The process, purpose, support etc is explained at initial enquiry stage and most people still progress. We don’t have a shortage of adopters here, no more than in the rest of the UK. I do think that it is becoming more common in England in today’s small world with social media etc. I do think it will become much more common practice and I personally agree with it in the right situation.

We have it twice a year and birth mum is much more real to them. I should say that BM loved them very much and did try her best, but her life circumstances meant she was never really ever going to be able to do it in their time frame. The system sadly let her down as a child. Our children are very much our children, we have total parental responsibility, we will get the privileged of bringing them up but jut because their BM could not do that I can’t see why she should be resigned to a face and a name in a lifestory book. Real and meaningful contact is right for my children and for the many I know who have it here but it not right for everyone. It is something that should be considered on a case by case basis. I think though itcould be possible in many more cases in the UK than currently considered.

It would be interesting to see the stats for open adoption in the USA where the child has been removed for child protection reasons, rather than relinquished because of poverty or stigma.

To generalise completely (and I agree that every case should be looked at individually), birth parents who relinquish because they don't feel able to parent in their current circumstances are more likely to be able to maintain a stable relationship with agreed boundaries with the adoptive family.

We had an open adoption, and while it has been positive overall (I think), it certainly caught up DDs in a degree of chaos that wasn't always good for them. Not because birth family didn't care, or were malicious, but simply because their lives were so chaotic. It was like living in a soap opera at times.

I was DDs respite carer, then foster parent, then adopted them, so our case was not the typical situation. It was the best solution for us. But since their birth parents died DDs have drifted away from extended family, and kept the relationships that provide nurture (previous carers) but not the disruption.

As others have said, long term foster care is not a good solution either. Back in August the Today programme on Radio 4 focussed on foster care with Lemm Sissay, who interviewed a trans-gender child with multiple foster placements. When asked what they think should change about foster care, to make it better for the children involved, they said that foster parents should not be able to end a placement easily, that they should be more committed. I listened to that thinking 'hmmmm, sounds like advocating adoption to me, the point about foster care is that the carers are NOT parents who have to stick it out'.

You can't really compare it to the us model which is akin to selling children and is tied up in religious fundamentalism, lack of abortion access and poor benefits. My friends paid over $40k to the bm to adopt their daughter, the bm "chose" them from cv's, the Microsoft (senior) salary was the attractive feature (by their own admission)

Well as previously mentioned I am also a foster carer and actually have a long term placement. He has been with us for 12 yrs and has complex needs like our adopted child. As he has grown older his behaviour has become increasingly challenging and aggressive but we hang in there for one simple reason. We love him ! It makes no odds to us that he is fostered he is as much our child as our birth children and adopted one . There are complex reasons I cannot go into as to why he hasn't been adopted but his legal status means nothing to us.
And we are not alone. I know of many foster carers with long term placements who hang in there no matter what. Many of the children have issues obviously but I can't think of any carers I know who have thrown the towel in easily. Indeed some have gone way beyond what could have been reasonably expected of them.
Let's not forget that some of the most difficult adoptive placements have fallen apart under intense pressure as of course do birth families.
Sorry to be touchy but I get a bit riled by the assumption that foster carers are throwing the towel in at the drop of a hat.

I think open adoption will become much more common and adopters will become more like long term foster carers with ongoing contact with birth families facilitated wherever possible.

God, I hope not (or at least not that it becomes the norm). I once knew a Scandinavian SW who worked with that model, it was horrific for the children. I know a couple of UK FCs where ongoing contact regularly distresses the children, but can't be stopped.

I don't think I'd be the person I am today if I'd been forced to do that, adoption was not a big deal precisely because I had a normal childhood. I would not let the person who's actions meant DD2 will never see or walk as well as others anywhere near her, until DD is old enough to choose it herself.

My suspicion is that one of the things preventing this now is that adoption is a cheap option for LA's compared to long term foster care.

This is very true, but I think a big factor is that the outcomes for long term care are not nearly as good as the outcomes for adoption. There are simply not enough FCs like flapjack and they don't have the same control over their situation as an adoptive parent does.

I think more resources would enable more contact and that can only be a good thing, but I think regular face to face will remain the exception. Most BPs have repeatedly made terrible choices, it takes a lot to change that pattern. The interests of the kids, as determined by their parents, must come first.

"Lemm Sissay, who interviewed a trans-gender child with multiple foster placements. When asked what they think should change about foster care" I'd be very interested to hear that programme, Allington, if you can remember what it was called, please? we have a trans child in the wider family (not adopted).

flapjackfairy you are doing an amazing job and it must be tough. Our kids are sometimes very challenging, one is a birth child and one is adopted but it doesn't make life easier that they are birth or adopted, it just is what it is. I really hope you are getting all the help you can. We do back frequently to sources of support and battle for the support we need and it can be a real battle.

I don't think regular contact with birth families where kids have been removed for abuse or neglect is going to be in the best interests of the children. I think kids can be very good at putting up with thins adults would not want to put up with but it doesn't mean it is good for them, IMHO.

@Italiangreyhound
We actually get more support for our adopted child than we do for our foster child. He comes from a local auth who are frankly unbelievably bad ( partly responsible for the fact we have never managed to adopt him ). Until a year ago we didn't even get any respite for him and we fund most equipment ourselves because it is impossible to get them to pay up even though it is their responsibility ( by equipment I mean large items that cost thousands that are necessary to care for him ).
You see that is another fallacy right there, that foster carers get loads of support to help them cope with v challenging children !
As I said there are many fc dealing with children at the v extremes of behaviour with little support who still hang in there because they care for the children .

@flapjackfairy that is so bad that you do not get the support you need. How awful for your child and you because you've not had tgat sorrt. We have been very lucky, I know that. Xxx

As an adoptee I greatly would hope that there would be a move towards open adoptions and this is a view which has been expressed by many adoptees in a recent report, which I can find and link if needed.

Where change within birth family is not feasible, far more f2f contact with more such birth parents is necessary with far better training, support and assistance with management of the contact for adopters.

This can be done without affecting permanence - the key thing is how it is managed, and having far more input by psychologists alongside social workers would be useful.

There are other models to consider other than the US model. Australia has been a centre of excellence for research and open adoption is available to the majority of adoptions as a result of the research. Pinklady has mentioned Ireland. Other countries in Europe do things differently too - though their entire social support set up is different - for example, psychologists working with adopters in relation to every birth family visit where necessary.

How adoption has been done in the UK for the last 40 years or so has not worked and it is a heavy cost for many adoptees, many adopters and society generally, and means problems are just continuing generation to generation.

I do think (again) that adoptee voices need to be listened to and in a recent report (which I will try to find) the message loud and clear was more contact with birth family.

I don't think regular contact with birth families where kids have been removed for abuse or neglect is going to be in the best interests of the children

@italiangreyhound just adding to my previous post to respond to your comment above - I have made this point before - I was removed due to neglect and so that is my personal experience and i had more than average contact with birth family and it was of immense, immense importance and value - and just to explain this, "neglect and abuse" covers a myriad of situations ranging from LDs, MH, inadequate parenting due to inadequate parenting themselves, intentional abuse - whether contact will work has to be assessed on a case by case basis, but within the wide range of situations falling under the term "neglect/abuse" a very significant number would be suitable for direct contact if the contact were properly managed.

sassy I totally agree with you "assessed on a case by case basis".

"...within the wide range of situations falling under the term "neglect/abuse" a very significant number would be suitable for direct contact if the contact were properly managed." If tgis were the case for our son,I would be very supportive of it

In my view it is always what is best for the child, but the adults

not the adults