Reasons not to adopt

[Anon42153]

If facing years of fertility issues, and now realisation set in that biological child is not a possibility. Would you adopt? What would your reasons for not wanting to adopt be?

Adopter losses should not get equal consideration compared with the needs/losses of a child. Children's needs should come first and adopters need sufficient skills to be able to achieve this.

Loss is loss. It's not a competition.

You appear to believe the rate of adoption disruption is far higher than I believe it to be. What is the source of your idea that adoptions disrupt, more than they are successful?

You're correct, that we can never run this as an experiment. We can't get identical twins, and put one in long term foster care, one in adoption, and compare. That sort of evidence is lacking, and is unethical. However, I do think the outcomes from the care system as a whole, on population average, are so poor, that even the small improvement offered to some children by adoption being least worst, means it's worth it for some children, given the system and society we live in.

Long term foster can end on the whim of one (perhaps bad apple, perhaps just stressed and making a mistake) social worker. It denies children inheritance from the people who parent them. It denies that relationship in law. I think it's a lot less secure than adoption.

I'd like to see stats to support your idea that adoptions distrupt at the same rate long term foster placements are changed, because I would be VERY surprised if they're even in the same ballpark.

@takeoffyourboots I don’t think we’re actually in disagreement that the children’s needs must come first, or that their losses take preeminence in adoption.

Where we perhaps differ is in recognising that any adopters capacity is untested until the point of placement, which can throw up all kinds of issues that the adopted believed to be resolved until that time.

The assessment process doesn’t adequately assess adopters resilience and can’t fully prepare them for their emotional response to caring for, claiming and loving a traumatised child. In my experience social workers have a pretty rudimentary understanding of trauma, and particularly trauma response in adults and so are relying on adopters being open and self reflective, and are generally ill equipped to know how to support that process.

I know many adopters who have been completely caught off guard by their own response, at that point they need skilled support to know how to put their feelings to one side and prioritise their child, while also attending to their own self care.

I agree that stable, resilient, self aware individuals offer the best chance of being able to offer the child what they need, I also think that adoption can knock the most stable, resilient, self aware individual on their arse.

"I also think that adoption can knock the most stable, resilient, self aware individual on their arse"

That really resonated with me @Jellycatspyjamas!

I am a potential future adopter and @Jellycatspyjamas comments around loss resonated with me. All parties do experience loss within the majority of adoptions. Of course the child’s loss is the most important one but it is not a ‘loss competition’. Having a background of infertility and pregnancy loss has helped me become a stronger person and develop more empathy for other people’s losses. I do feel able to facilitate contact with the birth family as appropriate in a way I probably wouldn’t have been able to before. Many children grieve their foster careers when they are placed with their adopted family and understanding grief will help parents comfort them when they are sad and angry.

@hollowtalk posted on 22.10.20 sorry didn't see your message.
Yes we are in the UK and last daughter placed when she was 3 and I was 65 and DH was 62. I think they were desperate as they approached us 🙄

I was in your situation and we did adopt. We had many happy years as a family but currently have issues as DD contacted her birth family. My advice would be change their names, make sure they don't know birth families names or whereabouts, its caused a lot of heartache.

Autumnmoods, anyone can find anyone if they want to. I'm sorry you have issues because your daughter contacted her birth family but her desire to do so is perfectly normal and reasonable. It doesn't always work out well but at least she 'knows'. It shouldn't affect her relationship with you, you're still her mum.

I was told my mother had died! I was four when I was told that and thereafter it was never discussed. I never believed it and found her when I was 37.

@Autumnmoods that is so wrong that I can’t put it into words.

[quote Greeneyes78]@Autumnmoods that is so wrong that I can’t put it into words.[/quote]
It would certainly lead to a person/couple failing stage one now due to the damage it would inflict on a child placed with them.

Autumnmoods that is awful advice, no adopter going in with that attitude will be approved.

I suspect Autumnmoods means until they are old enough to handle it.

Unscheduled contact, too early, without support, can be very damaging.

Maybe I should have explained...DD is still a young child (11) and both the police and SS were horrified that she knew enough information to trace them and make contact. She was removed for her own safety and thats now been greatly compromised.

@autumnmoods I agree with others that your advice is slightly alarming, but I can understand your state of panic, do you think starting a new thread with more information might help, as there may be others with some good advice?

@percypetulant You appear to believe the rate of adoption disruption is far higher than I believe it to be. What is the source of your idea that adoptions disrupt, more than they are successful? the same sources as you, probably - personal testimony, indications by adoption uk, feedback from professionals involved day to day, review of such data as there is in the adoption enquiry I mentioned upthread. It isn't a firm belief on my part, however. I would prefer there to be firm data. In relation to adoption being successful, I hear what you say, but as I said upthread the analysis during the 2018 enquiry was that a lot needed to be done to assess adoption policy and how it could be done better. That is the extent of my knowledge.

Of course the child’s loss is the most important one but it is not a ‘loss competition’ just to briefly respond to this, I in fact think that the statement "all parts of the triangle come to adoption from a place of loss" does suggest almost that it is a competition and that adopter losses and needs are "equal", possibly. I think discussions about loss, thinking about how to assess adopter resilience, analysing coping strategies and so on are all excellent and worthwhile. But I think possibly just consider whether the above statement is useful, needed, and whether or not it is diminishing the child's losses and needs. NB it is inaccurate - not all adopters adopt from a point of loss.

I also think that adoption can knock the most stable, resilient, self aware individual on their arse

I forgot to also say your statement here is broad brush - very resilient and emotionally intelligent people will be affected significantly less, and recover significantly more quickly. This would make a significant difference for the children involved. Amongst existing adopters abilities in this area are going to vary significantly.

@takeoffyourboots

So you have no source for your assertions?

Adoption provides stability, belonging, a real family. It gives many children what they deserve. Disruption, while not rare, isn't common either.

If you believe long term foster is so good, are you offering that to a child who needs it? If not, why not?

I think if you read my posts again you will be clearer about what I have said, percy.

You said that adoption was the least worst option and I said that at the moment there was no objective assessment supporting that.

I then explained that the enquiry 2018 found that there was a significant dearth of informing research re adoption and that more work was urgently needed.

I am really not sure how you could convert this into "fostering is good i need to foster" and what I actually said that was that in practice how well adoption and lt fostering worked will depend on the people involved. Do you genuinely disagree with that?

Above I am just stating facts. The only personal opinion I offered was about disruption but NB I didn't just refer to disruption, I referred also to total relationship breakdown, which I think one could reasonably infer from the info available might well be over 50 percent unfortunately - but we don't know as there is no reliable info available.

Incidentally I do know personally of disruptions ie child left home before 18 which were not recorded as disruptions. And also the percentage will depend on whether you are looking at post placement but pre AO disruptions

If you disagree and you want to hold firm to the mantra that how adoption is done at the moment is fine and good, then that is fine too

PS if you want to debate further it is probably worth you reading the 2018 enquiry first.

PPS I have read personal testimonies of LT fostering being amazing on mumsnet ie posters who were fostered long term. I am not saying "this is better" I am just pointing out that it can work well. As you say, a SW could end it at any time and that highlights a different problem in the system

Given that some children cannot be cared for within their birth family, there needs to be a long term solution for these children.

In the case of my children, adoption is the least worse option. fact This is the case for many, but not all, children who cannot be cared for by their birth family.

I actually don't want to debate at all, but it's clear you have no evidence for your assertions there are high rates of disruptions, or that 'there is no addition security' with adoption vs foster care. Legally, there is additional security for children through adoption- they get real actual parents and families, rather than a 'corporate parent', they get inheritance rights, the people who care for them and know them get parental rights, and can name a guardian, they get belonging, identity, permanence, and stability. Yes, it's not always perfect, but for many children, it's the least worst option available.

I said "Often, for children, adoption is the least worst option"- I stand by this. Often it is. You said that's an unproven theory, I say it's absolutely not a theory- often it is the least worst option, given the situations for these children.

You appear very judgmental of adopters for not being perfect, for having suffered losses themselves, and for being human.

What is your role in the care of vulnerable children? Have you experienced the care system as an adopter, or foster carer? Because then you'd see that "Often, for children, adoption is the least worst option".

You are making this personal now which isn't particularly impressive on your part. I have been clear about sources and correct in my summary. If you disagree link your sources. If you are saying "very often it is the least worse option" then that is your opinion and I am not attacking you for it.

You say i am judgemental about adopters - but the fact is if you have an adopter who cannot resolve conflict or have a discussion without making it personal then actually, you are probably looking at someone who should not have been held suitable to adopt imo.

Looking after traumatised children is hard and if you have adopters with unresolved loss I do think that there is also problem there. Me pointing that out is not being gratuitously or unhelpfully "judgemental"

I am out and hiding the thread so don't bother replying, I won't see it.

If those of us who adopt are so unsuitable, and you'd be so amazing, I think you should volunteer.

(or be a long term foster carer. Or do whatever solution you believe that is the best option for children neglected/abused/abandoned by their birth family)

Adopters are human, doing their best in an imperfect system, doing the least worst option for children who have been given starts they didn't deserve.