One for the parents of adopted teens

[BrontëParsonage]

Happy to be told I’m being unreasonable but I feel extremely angry that AD1(15) has been sent an invitation to this event below, run by PAC-UK/The Family Rights Group. We are not currently in a good place as an adoptive family, after 15 years, so this may be clouding my judgement somewhat. Just to add, Lifelong Links is about ‘reconnecting’ children with people from their past, via a Family Group Conference. I’m probably being over sensitive but I’m feeling today like the world’s worst treated and totally unpaid, long-term babysitter.

The flyer sounds very naive. My daughter has recently made contact with her birth mother and in theory it could be a good thing for her to explore questions around that. But not in a group with other severely traumatised teens. Who will manage the potential fallout? Many of these teenagers struggle with their mental health. This definitely should not be send out randomly to 15 year old adoptees.

I am also concerned about the name "family rights group". Which family, whose rights and rights to what? "People you have lost contact with" could mean all sorts of things in this context... How are these teenagers being kept safe?

In theory, this could be a good thing though. Lots of teenagers make contact with their birth families and I don't see much support available to them or their families. Offering life story work is one thing, but what about the actual management of the situation?

@onlytherain thanks for replying: it’s a bit tumbleweed here sometimes (please, God, this forum doesn’t go the way of the AUK forums!) This is the mission statement of the Family Rights Group:

What does the Family Rights Group do?
Family Rights Group works with families, professionals, decision makers and academics to develop and promote policies and practices that: help children to be raised safely and securely within their families. build the family and community support networks of children who are unable to live with their parents.

As to your other points, I totally agree. I’m tempted to email PAC-UK and ask them if Davina will be hosting! From a personal perspective, I’m not opposed to direct contact with birth family; in fact, each year, I facilitate and supervise several face-to-face meet-ups with the birth mother of my AD2(7). My children are non-birth related.

I just think that this is a poorly thought through exercise in extrapolating that what works well for young people in the care system, should simply be transferred wholesale to the adoption arena.

I agree about the tumbleweeds. How I wished AUK would see the light, go back to the old format and send invitations out to Pluto, Donatella, Peartree and all the other wise women.

I am not opposed to birth family contact either. We have frequent contact to siblings and, as mentioned before, one of my daughters has made contact with her birth mother. Contact has been highly beneficial in some respects for my children, but, at times, also created massive challenges and concerns for all of us.

The family rights group leave "their families" undefined. They seem very birth family focused, which is fine as long as they keep adopted children safe.

I think this could be very destabilising for an adopted teen. Adoption isn't "being in care", it's a stable alternative to that. I share your discomfort with this.

Teens are not well known for their mature decision making, self preservation, emotional management. I think this is very ill thought out.

Who gave your DD this flyer? I would be having strong words with them.

@Catleveltired Who gave your DD this flyer? I would be having strong words with them.

It was PAC-UK!

This may not necessarily mean birth family.
Foster children now have life long links, mine is retaining links with 2 carers from his residential home.
My adopted son is still in touch with his primary school teacher and has just recently reconnected with the foster family he was with for 4 years, and another child from school who was fostered. Its been really valuable to him.
I think it's probably if little or no use to children who were adopted as babies or very young children who won't have much memory of other people.
My son was 8 when he came to me so has memories of numerous people.
I agree its probably not the right way to go about developing it though

I’d have concern that they contacted him directly (how did they manage that), given an adopted child might not tell their parents about it for many, understandable, reasons. As a parent you at least need to have the discussion about how stable things are just now and how possible it is for your teen to have meaningful, helpful involvement.

Given they’re also saying they have very limited capacity, they risk opening a can of worms while being unable to actually make and support those links.

I can see the benefit, particularly where older children have had multiple losses and may want to link in with people they’ve lost contact with but they’ve gone about it in the wrong way. I’m so sick of organisations trying to run around the parents who both know their young people and who will inevitably pick up the pieces at the other end all in the name of empowerment.

👋 to the fellow adoptive parents of teens and to the honorary wise women of this board. So, to answer a few questions, AD1 is associated with PAC-UK as she belongs to a group that presents training to social workers and other professionals on the reality of life as an adopted teen. Personally, I feel that this is yet another example of adoption being exploited by associated professionals and organisations for monetary purposes. PAC-UK, in my book, are trying to turn adoption inside and out and back to front to maximise on potential Government grants. Organisations in this arena simply cannot be all things to all people as there are such polarised experiences and points of view. You watch, Lifelong Links Family Group Conferences will soon be on the accredited list of ‘therapies’ for the ASF - and no doubt at an annual cost of £5K per pop!

@Ted27 , as I’ve said before, I’m not averse to forging and maintaining broken links for each of my children - and I think that my commitment to regular face-to-face contact with the BM of my AD2 speaks volumes in this regard. We also stay in touch with the second set of FC of AD1 and have done for 15 years. I think the biggest issue for me is the cranky attempt to extrapolate something that may work well for children in the care system and then transpose it on adopted children and their families. As you know, having feet in both camps now, there are massive shades of grey between adoption and fostering.

Not specifically relevant to this thread but related to the concept of people getting it spectacularly wrong…there is a current live thread about party invitations and school GDPR and a bright spark has posited that it’s a shame that those pesky LAC spoil it for everyone else. And why can’t they be given a new name for school so party mums can do party invitations. Does anyone else have the energy to hand the poster’s proverbial to them on a plate? I’ve tried but rhino hide.

I’ve had the shittiest day advocating for my pesky LAC experienced child, point me in the right direction…

@Jellycatspyjamas yes, you are the perfect woman for the job! ✊Its a thread in primary education (I also have AD2 who is seven) and it’s titled something like ‘school GDPR). 🐅👩

You fought a valiant fight, I’ve been much less polite 😄

Brava! You were magnificent! Shame on all the self-proclaimed teachers on the thread who didn’t turn a hair at the suggestion. Just shows that we will always be like Sisyphus, pushing that immense boulder uphill. Which is really hard to bear at times - just when things are as bad as they can get and then we are expected to push some more.

The idea of NIMBY for foster kids is really odd. People like to think "we don't get those kids round here".

if either of mine had been this age 15/16 it could have been very destabilising for them.

The point of adoption is to give the young person stability in childhood and into adulthood. Adoption is meant to be different from fostering, and you can't just transpose traces from one to the other.