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 won’t be posting links

Don't see why you won't try to provide a negative Jelly :-)

You know the old saying: extraordinary claims require no evidence.

Ok, so I am going to sounds like a bit of a stickler here but just to clarify:

@allington what I said about the report was "one of the stated outcomes following the report i mentioned was a commitment to look at the issue of increasing required contact" - the rest of the things I have said were not assertions but just my personal opinion so completely distinct from the report. The report recommendations are indeed to review contact - the wording I used above was paraphrased, but if you read all the documents, reviewing contact, letterbox, direct contact arrangements, severance with bio family - it is given a lot of coverage.

@flapjackfairy it was me and I said that better management was needed - NOT more input from SWs or anyone - but better management.

In relation to experts, I see a vast difference between a psychiatrist/clin psych and a SW - both experts but not in the same field. Also, there are experts and experts, granted. But I think that at the same time, to write off all experts because of some bad experiences is not helpful or justifiable in terms of meeting your dc's needs.

@italiangreyhound absolutely - as I said my intention was not to cause offence.

@donquixotedelamancha I think most of my posts are thoughtfully put but being human occasionally I get irritated and also may respond like with like if someone is being goady - in relation to italian (who wasn't being goady) there was a bit of miscommunication and careless wording both sides and we have now discussed and shared our different points of view and it is all good. In relation to your views on psychology, that is absolutely fine - we can hold different views on the subject. In relation to causing offence it is unfortunately the case that each triangle member will occasionally unwittingly cause offence to others. It is what it is - for my part I usually suck it up as I have done mostly on this thread. In relation to the contact debate, it is an emotive polarised debate and we are coming at it from very different perspectives and experiences and that is why there is some fallout - we come at this from different angles - I am not particularly happy about some of the posts here just as you aren't happy about some of mine.

@jellycatspyjamas right - about to read your long post now - will then have a nice cup of tea and do a lovely reply.

@jellycatspyjamas I have read your long post and it is interesting but it takes us no further. I think you are still misunderstanding the difference between fairly longstanding and unchallenged research about how the brain develops which informs much of the parenting advice (and again the author of ahaparenting is in fact very clear with much of her advice) and the fact that there are various theories and debates and discussions and changing ideas about pretty much everything under the sun - in short, we know a lot, and we know what we know, but there is still much to be debated and learned.

In essence, I think that you have formed a very strong dogmatic view of what I think from me writing a few posts.

I understand complexities, but I think it is useful to sometimes distil into manageable bites in terms of advice to communicate effectively - and I do think that much of my advice is in fact quite helpful (or at least I am told it is, often) - but if you think I have got something wrong, then just challenge it at the time in an open minded courteous way and I will be happy to reply as I have done on this thread.

In terms of "x" and "y" I could give some examples of where I think the TP advice is dangerous and we could debate that if you like - on another thread.

In terms of how to help someone live a safe, healthy, happy life I think possibly one thing you could consider is that helping an adult is different from helping a child grow to be someone who lives a safe, healthy, happy life, because of what I have said above about brain development - and again I would be happy to debate with you on another thread.

I think also it might serve you to be more open minded about my approach as you work with adults recovering from trauma and I am an adult who has recovered from trauma - or at least if I were in your shoes I would be interested. For example - you are a psychotherapist and you build a relationship with your clients which lasts many years - many adoptees do not want to work with psychotherapists or counsellors, and find other ways of recovering from trauma - or shelving it - and I might be able to help your understanding of that, if you were interested.

I don't feel attacked by you, don't worry. I didn't think you'd link anything

I would rather you reflected on this and it changed the way we interact on future posts, rather than you coming back with another long post - simply because I don't have much time right now and I feel guilty every time I get sucked back in

@jellycatspyjamas i have just realised I have missed an entire post from you earlier - which I now respond to below:

What do you call extreme though? I am really surprised you ask this - firstly because I was paraphrasing psych advice (not my opinion) and secondly because obviously this is going to be complex and assessed on a case by case basis. Some things will be obviously extreme (and I am not even sure that is the word psychs use in this respect) - in relation to other things it will depend on the affect and i did say that. For example - the neglect I experienced in early years was physical but there was no emotional or physical abuse, no substance abuse, no antisocial behaviour and there was much love in the household - in my case continued contact was beneficial. This is just one example. There isn't a list of what is and what isn't extreme - it would be assessed.

Psychology has far from developed to where doing “x” equals “y”, i don’t know a psychologist who would remotely make such claims. If they could our communities wouldn’t be full of people struggling with significant mental health issues ok, well we have done this to death now - I have explained once more in my last post.

If you understood anything about trauma response... can I just stress that this is an extraordinarily unhelpful, aggressive thing to say - especially to someone who has said they have suffered trauma. I am not offended or upset about it, and i don't feel attacked, but it does make it very hard to engage with you.

[...] place of fighting for survival. You’d know that people (children and adults) can’t just be managed out of the automatic responses to triggers - that their systems take over to keep them safe. So contact with people who have been dangerous and frightening will elicit a fight or flight response, children's systems are hyper vigilant and either over or under react to threat etc etc, their capacity for emotional regulation compromised so that in our case contact with foster carers left them traumatised for months afterwards - not because it wasn’t managed well but because managed well or not, their autonomic nervous system was triggered in contact and no one, least of all them, had any way of preventing that other than not having contact I find it extraordinary that you think I don't understand these issues - but yes, this kind of trauma can be recovered from - and I am living proof, as is my child, as are many, many people out there who have recovered successfully from trauma and who have suffered trauma and yet have robust mental health. (Jeez...) (Sorry, getting sassy again, but.. jeez...)

You seem to think that simply adding some psychological input into the situation will render every child well, whole and healthy yes I do thinkthis, if it is the right help (and as you say there are many different ways of helping) at the right time.

Psychological input can be helpful, psychotherapy can be helpful, specific trauma interventions can be helpful but no one size fits all and where have I said differently?

You say you’ve educated yourself about trauma, while showing a staggering lack of understanding of trauma responses in children and while being dismissive and disrespectful of the expertise of people who have personal and professional experience in this field and yet you have a thread full of adopters saying they won't work with experts, the experts get it wrong, and parents know best.....

Your opinion matters, of course it does and again, I didn't say that - I said I had a valid opinion equal to any other on the thread. Worth stating as adoptees are often told otherwise.

@sassygromit you’ve made a huge number of assumptions about me and my work, many of which are incorrect, you don’t know me, my background or my motivations. I’ve tried to explain something of the very wide knowledge base around trauma and child development which it seems you’ve pretty much dismissed - which is your prerogative. I don’t have time to answer all the points made and tbh see little point. I’m glad you’ve found something that so clearly works for you.

@sassygromit I don't think I ever said that i was writing off all psychologists / psyciatrists or other experts input ! There are some good therapists about and no doubt some bad ones , much the same as social workers and every other professional field And it was a therapist who worked specifically with children in care who had trauma and attachment issues. She was putting in intensive support to manage contact and was excellent in my opinion but it still all ended in disaster . And I am not just talking about one isolated case either. Myself and other foster carers I know have seen many examples of contact that is frankly damaging to the children involved, ( who lets face it are the most important ones in this who scenario). In fact in a lot of cases the birth parents needs are prioritised which seems all wrong to me.
Dont get me wrong I am not saying all contact is bad . Of course not . It works well for some children though in most cases in seems to lead to a period of instability for children both before and after the event which is perhaps understandable.
As I have already said it is a v complex situation and there is no one size fits all solution and to pretend otherwise would frankly be ridiculous.

Oh and finally I have never refused to work with experts and don't see anybody else saying that either !
I spend my life engaging with them in every area of my life as I have 2 children ( 1 ltfc 1 adopted ) with extremely complex needs so I am forever dealing with medical professionals , sws, reviewing officers etc etc ,
And yes there are times when we don't agree! For example my adopted child has a v rare epilepsy syndrome and I have read everything I can get my hands on to educate myself. In fact because it is so rare I have now read more of the current research than my neurologist has because he hasn't the time to read everything on every syndrome. So at times I am giving him info and my considered opinion on what is best to try next and we work together to try and achieve the best outcomes we can.
And that is how it should be . I respect his expert opinion , he asks mine on unusual symptoms and seizures that are so subtle they are often missed even by the medical profession. But not by me because I am constantly watching him and I know him inside out.
So we work as a team ( only one of numerous specialists who help keep my son going ) but at the end of the day if they recommend a treatment that I feel will be detrimental to him then I say no and we find another way.
It should be the same process with all expert interventions in our adoptive families in my opinion.

@sassygromit

@flapjackfairy you sound an amazing parent. I mean that most sincerely. My dd has a situation going on that I need to read up on and I do sometimes feel I have to know the next move. Quite scary at times!

One thing I must say all our kids may have their issues etc but I know we are trying greatly on their behalf.

Mumnset has been such a source of wisdom for me, especially in the early days.

We are off to see some specialist this week for ds. Fingers crossed. I do see lights at the ends of tunnels... And wish the same for all of us. Xxxxxx

@Italiangreyhound.

I am just am ordinary parent really. Muddling along and getting it wrong at times as we all do . But thank you anyway.
And I could say the very same for you and many others who frequent this board.
And I really hope you get the help and support you need from the specialists.

In relation to your views on psychology, that is absolutely fine - we can hold different views on the subject.

I don't have strong views on psychology, I know enough to know what I don't know. I think it's quite possible for a lay person to understand what psychology is and isn't capable of in broad terms. I don't think that's a matter of 'different views'.

I think you are still misunderstanding the difference between fairly longstanding and unchallenged research about how the brain develops which informs much of the parenting advice

Thing is: I know, that you know, that Jelly is a psychotherapist. This sentence tickles me pink.

and yet you have a thread full of adopters saying they won't work with experts, the experts get it wrong, and parents know best.....

I am amazed that's what you got from this thread. You are making huge, unsupported, black and white statements and when people point out the problems with your analysis that does not mean they take an extreme opposite view.

I said I had a valid opinion equal to any other on the thread. Worth stating as adoptees are often told otherwise.

I'm an adoptee. I don't find that in life. I think there may be other variables causing this pattern.

Moving the conversation onwards, is anyone aware of any studies which might support a more modest hypothesis:

Is there any evidence from countries that routinely do more open adoptions (amongst BPs with similar profiles to the UK) about benefits or harms of contact?

We are all obviously aware of the benefits of well managed contact with BPs who are positively engaged. I'm wondering about studies from places like Scandinavia or some US states where contact still occurs even when BPs are (for example) still using drugs.

And I could say the very same for you and many others who frequent this board.

I'm frequently in awe of a number of regulars on here. I think it's great that we can have such robust theoretical debates and still be here to offer support to each other.

I totally agree. I like to hear all the different viewpoints and experiences represented here and it doesn't get nasty( though sometimes quite heated I grant you )
And one thing we all have in common is that we are passionate about adoption and making it the very best we can for the adoptees at the heart of it.

@flapjackfairy - thanks for explaining - it sounds as though how you work with your neurologist is how it should be, I have found the same - in relation to therapists I think that my point is there is a huge, vast difference between psychiatrists and clin psychs with relevant expertise and experience and other types of therapists/SWs/Sencos/other. I agree the less qualified ones can be a liability I have found the same thing.

@donquixotedelamancha @jellycatspyjamas I don't mind heated discussion or disagreements but I have to tell you that I have found your posts to me to be completely unjustified and in places pretty crass - however - wanting to move on, and be constructive, I have put the below together to try to explain further what I have said about "clear" advice - because I think it is really, really important for adopters to take on board. (don as an aside - jellycat's qualifications are not on the same level as psychiatrists or clin psychs with relevant areas of expertise - no disrespect to jellycat - so the "tickled pink" comment was slightly out of order).

So - this is a video made by Dr Laura Markham who jellycat has also mentioned - this is an example of what I would call clear unambiguous robust and unequivocal peer reviewed evidence based parenting advice - as an example around mid way through you will hear her say "I am going to tell you about a piece of research which has been going on - the studies about this - for about 50 years, and we have some very CLEAR indicators about what helps kids come out great - be responsible but also be emotionally intelligent and all around just wonderful people..."

It is well worth watching all the way through. And you may also perceive that much of it conflicts with NATP advice. Based on my experience this is really good advice for all parents.

Here is another video with the same CLEAR unequivocal evidence based advice:

f you have doubts, you can look at her website where you will find lists and lists of authority references - real science, don !!

You will also find clear evidence based direction in Penelope Leach Your Baby and Child:From Birth to Age Five- although your kids are older, jellcat, it is more clear evidence based advice in relation to child development and good general knowledge - but also it can help with older children to identify areas they missed out on - I read it as a young adult and it helped me identify areas I had missed out on, and it was life changing in fact.

The brain develops apace in years 1 - 3 and is 80pc wired up at 3, but can be rewired at any time if done in the right way, according to (good) research.

The vids are recommended to everyone, obviously - they are fantastic. Dr L M is just one person out there - you will find much the same thing said by the majority of the psych evidence based advisers.

I have to tell you that I have found your posts to me to be completely unjustified and in places pretty crass - however - wanting to move on, and be constructive.....don as an aside - jellycat's qualifications are not on the same level as psychiatrists or clin psychs.....so the "tickled pink" comment was slightly out of order

I really appreciate your desire to be constructive.

@jellycatspyjamas just one thing I wanted to come back to about one of your long posts - their autonomic nervous system was triggered in contact and no one, least of all them, had any way of preventing that other than not having contact - you can in fact help calm the autonomic nervous system, and once it is calm sufficiently you can then talk and recover from "triggering" so no, it isn't correct that the only way of preventing that was not having contact - which isn't to say it wasn't the right thing to do temporarily but it isn't the only way. Again, these are all things I have direct experience of - and I realise that you have vast disrespect for my experience of one - but if you talked to someone with more expertise than you, you might find the same advice. If you were able to get past the triggering, any "love" relationship is worth the effort, whether with bio or foster carers.

Moving the conversation onwards, what other changes do we think adoption will undergo over the next few years?

@donquixotedelamancha I'm an adoptee. I don't find that in life. I think there may be other variables causing this pattern come on, just staggeringly inappropriate and goady. I meant that adoptees often complain about not being listened to - which is why the recent enquiry was such a huge deal for many adoptees. Not you, I know, as you consider your bio family merely gene pool, you have said - but not all adoptees feel like that. I don't find that I am not listened to in life either, other than with you at present!

I have discussed the Scandinavian approach with some Scandinavians. The people I spoke to appeared to center birth parents' wants and needs, at least as much as (and could be argued more than) children. I'm not sure that's right. However, I can also believe that standards of foster care are very different to here. While here there are many great, dedicated foster carers, far exceeding the standards expected of them, I feel UK standards are set quite low.

Regular, managed contact with the people who made them is likely to be good for children. Irregular, poorly managed contact, especially in the context of abuse, is likely to be damaging. Contact doesn't become automatically good because adoption is involved. There are often threads on here about damaging NRPs, who have exposed their children to abuse, or abuse substances, etc, or are unreliable, and the consensus is usually that the children should not be exposed to that, and should be protected. Our children by adoption deserve just as much protection. Contact is tricky, and perhaps could be more than current levels. However, I suspect if there were the required funds available to set up a robust, supported contact system in our society, we would have the funds to support more children to not need removal and adoption in the first place, which I would actually prefer. Our LA can barely fund coordination for a couple of letters. And generally couldn't organise a fire in a match factory.

Another observation I have from this thread is about the idea that everyone's opinions should be considered equally, regardless of expertise. I don't believe that.

sassygrommit- While you have experience (of one), many of the posters here also have experience of managing big feelings in small people, and the difficulties of that fall out. That is no small thing, for parents, or for the small people.

You can't apply adult therapeutic ideas to children.

Moving the conversation onwards, what other changes do we think adoption will undergo over the next few years?

Have you read the enquiry, the recommendations and the responses as it covers a lot ground.

@taketotheskye I think you are posting to the wrong person - I said that you can't apply adult therapeutic ideas to children to another poster. My links are to a child psychologist, about bringing up children. (Also, no one has said everyone's opinion carries equal weight... you might want to read the thread more carefully...)

@taketotheskye - I just realised you might have been referring to my last post about triggering - I was referring to my experience of bringing up a child who suffered and recovered from very significant trauma.

Moving the conversation onwards, what other changes do we think adoption will undergo over the next few years?

What I would like to see is as above:- extensive universal support for young families, supported placements for young care leavers having their children, better funded contraceptive and family planning clinics, improvements in access to education for care leavers, especially girls, more pro-active support to stop child sexual exploitation... basically anything to stop cycles of abuse, trauma, and allow children to be created in the best circumstances, and looked after within their genetic family. For those that can't be, there will be increased early permanence, and later permanence, by the way of well supported (financial, practical, psychological etc) long term foster placements with foster carers trained and assessed to the standard of "would this be good enough for my child, rather than current standards, which I feel is set lower than social workers would accept for their own children, which sells our looked after children short. I realise that with any further Tory governments, this moves farther away.

What I think will happen is foster to adopt will be pushed and increased, to reduce fostering expenses for local authorities, older children will continue to be moved around foster carer, until they are so traumatised they need secure environments, and then they end up in jail. I think if anything, in England, contact is absolutely not on the agenda. It costs money, and there isn't any.

Disinvestment in universal family services was the worst false economy, IMO.

sassygrommit, sorry, your adopted child?