Men should not be able to adopt

[clarinsgirl]

Obviously related to recent tragic events but something I’ve been thinking about for a while. In England and Wales 99% of all those convicted of child sexual offences are men (ONS). 91% of all defendants in child abuse cases are men (ONS). So start point for adoption is men alone cannot adopt.

Of course I realise it’s not that simple but really interested to hear what others think.

This assumes women are a protective factor when abusive men adopt. They are not. Men in heterosexual couples abuse just as often, sometimes because the woman is unaware and does not suspect, sometimes because they are to various degrees complicit. Your proposition only makes sense if men are excluded from adopting altogether, which is simply unrealistic.

I think most adopters would love for their children to have ongoing therapy. And ehc plans - atm adopters have to fight for them like everyone else, often at significant expense.

I hear what you say about therapy for prospective parents. But for me the big issue is the general assumption in the sector that basically anyone can adopt if they have a spare room. It is what is driving the drive to recruit adopters - instead of identifying groups of people who would be able to deal with the challenges involved, they treat it like akin to doing race around the world - an exciting challenge which anyone who gets past the filtering process should be able to step up to do.

And so utterly naive, unprepared people get caught up in the excitement of it. They have probably been successful in some areas of life and believe this one will be no different.

Imo they need to stop targetting the LGBT+ community in the same way they currently target anyone and get much more real about who does well as adopters.

Has anyone researched this? Do they have a profile of who does best? I doubt it.

Btw I disagree that people with children already should be prioritised over the childless. I know a lot of adopters and in my experience a lotbof people with children are either driven by some saviour complex or are looking for the last piece of a jigsaw to complete their ideal family. They have patented successfully with their birth children and don't see the need to change. Problems are purely down to the child because they are good parents. So they can't be as flexible.

The trouble is, every culture across the centuries has had to come up with solutions for its unwanted / mistreated children. There is no easy solution. The UK system may not be perfect but it at least tries.

@Arran2024
I absolutely agree about recruitment. At least things have moved on from the days when they paraded cute blonde blue eyed toddlers on Good Morning Britain.
When I was looking for my son a children's SW spent a long time trying to convince me I would be perfect for her sibling group of 3 boys. Utter madness and a disaster waiting to happen if Id said yes.

@ForDearSwan how do you envisage these SW visits would work? Weekly, monthly, annually? What would the visit consist of. What if the child didnt want to see the SW?

We were seen regularly last by both my SW and his SW for the first year. My SW came to our celebration hearing.
He liked her, because she was fun and played with him. He didnt feel threatened by her.
He hated his SW. She didnt know how to play with or talk to him. As soon as she walked in he would do his nut and it would take me several days to restore calm. He thought she was coming to take him away.
What would you do about a child who refused to see their SW? Would you force a child to meet their SW.

Im happy to be corrected but I think that all the recent high profile cases had active SW involvement - it didn't protect them did it?

Adopters have to battle now for theraputic support for their children. Why would we object ?

@Ted27

Adoptee's need protection. The current system doesn't work.

I'm assuming, though I'm sure you and others will come on to correct or ask further questions for me, that a full review would have to happen. It's not up to me or one person to determine. However, those questions and others could/should be part of a review and added safety precautions/checks for adoptees. It's a pretty disingenuous question in fairness Ted.

Finally got my account back after several folks decided to report my account. Great work to all involved 👏

Why do adoptees need protection? I mean, any more so than any other child? Even foster children aren't visited weekly.

There are all sorts of unsafe situations for children in their families. Look at surrogacy - that's a disaster about to unfold imo.

What about single mothers moving a new partner in - maybe they should receive weekly visits?

What about home schooled kids? Disabled kids? Autistic kids? Kids with learning disabilities? Deaf kids?

The idea that adopters alone should be singled out for this high level supervision and adoptees "protected" while all around, children are vulnerable in all sorts of ways, doesn't make sense to me.

I do agree that the whole system needs much more support. But like the previous poster said, social worker visits can be extremely triggering for adopted children and cause no end of problems.

And we shouldn't forget that many adopters experience high levels of challenging behaviour, and are often ostracised by family, neighbours, friends, school contacts. Adopters need support too.

Your questions have already been touched upon a few times on these threads.

@ForDearSwan
Why do adoptive families need more intrusive protection than any other.

This NSPCC report is clear where the majority of child deaths occur.
https://learning.nspcc.org.uk/research-resources/statistics-briefings/child-deaths-abuse-neglect

All children need protecting. Pouring vast amounts of resources into scrutiny of adoptive families would be at the expense of all children and not prevent the majority of child deaths

https://childprotectionresource.online/if-a-parent-has-parental-responsibility-and-no-one-cares-what-remedies-do-they-have/.

Adoptee's are at least 4 times more likely to try to commit suicide than people not adopted. Though recent studies show it's much higher.

That's just one reason why adopted children need more supports, therapy and sw involvement till adulthood.

pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3784288/

zoomoutmap search menu

Journals

Social Sciences

Volume 15

Issue 3

10.3390/socsci15030167
Download PDF
settings
Order Article Reprints
Open AccessArticle
Long-Term Mental Health Effects of Mother–Child Separation Due to Adoption
by
Lynn Roche Zubov

Department of Education, Winston-Salem State University, 601 S. Martin Luther King, Jr. Drive, Winston-Salem, NC 27110, USA
Soc. Sci. 2026, 15(3), 167; https://doi.org/10.3390/socsci15030167
Submission received: 20 January 2026 / Revised: 20 February 2026 / Accepted: 24 February 2026 / Published: 5 March 2026
(This article belongs to the Section Family Studies)
Downloadkeyboardarrowdown Versions Notes

Abstract
The Preliminary Exploration into Adoption Reunions (PEAR) survey examined the mental health issues faced by adoptees and first mothers. Data were collected from 1313 adoptees, first mothers, and first fathers. Study results indicate that adoption has lasting adverse effects on both adoptees and first mothers. Adoptees and first mothers are significantly more likely to attempt suicide (35 times and 37.7 times, respectively), abuse alcohol, display hypersexual behaviors, and restrict their eating compared to their peers: While first mothers have a lower life expectancy and are more likely to die by suicide than women who did not lose their children to adoption, adoptees frequently struggle with their identity and sense of belonging. They expressed experiencing trauma from their separation from their first mothers, regardless of the quality of their adoptive parents. The findings also highlight the negative impact of the secrecy surrounding adoption. Themes of secrecy and shame were prevalent in the responses from both adoptees and first mothers. The findings highlight the importance of listening to and validating the experiences of adoptees and first mothers and that there needs to be transparency in adoption practices, which may reduce the stigma associated with adoption, and facilitate healing.

Another reasons? Have I given you enough examples yet Ted?

@ForDearSwan

Im dropping out of this now. The thread was about should men be allowed to adopt and scrutiny of prospective adopters

I dont think anyone would dispute the need for adoptees to have theraputic support.

That is a different issue to what you seemed to be suggesting - ie supervision or monitoring of adoptive families to protect adoptees from abuse.
My own son is an adult now. We had social services involvement when it was required - ie when we were arranging therapy. That was appropriate and necessary for a specific period of time
I have absolutely no issue with that.
We did not need ongoing visits from SWs.

I'm actually advocating for more protections and safety for adoptees. If you choose to take that as meaning scrutiny of your or others parenting that's your take. You asked why I believed that adopted children should have more resources made available to them. I answered your question.

This thread is about should men be allowed to adopt. I have answered yes, but all adoptee's should have pre and post adoption support. You asked. Try not to twist that I have made this about a completely different topic.

👋 👋

@ForDearSwan
The problem is you are conflating access to therapy for adoptees (helpful) with intrusive scrutiny (disrupting) . The adopters on this thread are welcoming the first but pushing back on the second.

Absolutely. We know how vulnerable adopted children are, but there is no evidence it is due to their adoptive parents. They are vulnerable because of their genetic inheritance, intra uterine experience, early life experiences, attachment issues.....and now adopters are the ones to blame?!!

I'm not doing that. I'm advocating for post adoption support for adoptees including support and regular access from sw. Adopters are choosing to view this as scrutiny. Adoptees should have that support.

Apologies.

So you are wanting more support to be available for adoptees. I think most adopters would agree with that. They often cry out for help but don't get it. Presumably adopters as the parents would be involved in requesting this and it wouldn't just be imposed by the state.

You aren't saying more oversight/supervision of adopters - anyone asking for that specifically would I think be implying they think adopters are more likely to be inappropriate parents than random birth parents.

Exactly. This isn't about scrutiny of adopted parents. Yes, ideally it would be mandated in law.

It's about the child not the adopted parent.

There was (probably still is) push back from adopted parents on virtually every update to adoption and how it's practiced.

You and other adopted parents commenting are choosing to view the suggestion of extra mandated support for adoptees post adoption till 18 as a scrutiny or criticism of parenting practices.

Investigators are going into the adoption agency, local authority and hospital https://www.communitycare.co.uk/content/news/preston-davey-macalister-sends-in-experts-to-scrutinise-agencies-involved-in-boys-case

Have you adopted any children? I have and believe me the process was incredibly long and invasive. The weekly visits were akin to therapy; poring over your entire family history and being quizzed on every relationship, job, home you've ever had. If you've had fertility struggles or loss in the past it is expected that you have had therapy to deal with this before being considered as an adopter. The process is extremely long and intense and that's just in order to be approved to go ahead - then comes the matching process which involves various parties scrutinising you. All of this is done with the child at the centre and focussing on what is best for them.
We had weekly visits from social work, plus other officials visiting, monitoring and compiling reports on us.
How this horrendous situation went unnoticed is beyond my comprehension. I do know that staff shortages and absence can have a huge impact on social work and health visitors not always being on top of things.
Obviously people will be reacting emotionally to this case but those who have no real experience with adoption or foster care are in no place to say how it should be reformed. You need to have a solid understanding of how it works at the moment and what could be realistically improved, bearing in mind funding limitations and ensuring that you still can attract suitable potential adopters.

I think your comment "you want to care for a child that's not biologically yours..." is incredibly dismissive and completely ignorant of all that adopters have been through to become their child's parent.

All adoptees DO have pre and post adoption support - it's just not MANDATORY!

Post adoption support for adoptees should be MANDATORY till adulthood. The support the adoptee has isn't enough.

How do you know? Do you have direct experience of this?
You can't force children into therapy. You also can't assume that because a child was adopted that they need external therapy. In many cases, if the adoptive parents were adequately trained and supported then they should be able to give the child everything they need.

The understanding of trauma and it's affects evolves. My proximity or not to adoption isn't relative. I could be an person who has experience of adoption through work or family experience, I could be an adopted person. I could be a person who has lost a child to adoption or and adopted parent or have no personal connection to adoption. I stand by previous comment that adopted parents aren't the experts on adoption. Many of you believe you are.

Rightly so people expecting to adopt children should have vigorous screening. It's not dismissive or completely ignorant to want more screening and more protections for cared for children that are adopted.

It's extremely interesting to see how defensive and rotten adopted parents commenting are being towards someone with different ideas and opinions to their's. I've been told i'm aggressive, that I'm hijacking a public thread, that I haven't a clue etc etc, all because I'm advocating for better support for adopted children pre and post adoption.

@ForDearSwan

You cannot force any one to participate in therapy. You have to be ready for it and want to engage
My son had two theraputic strategies agreed when he was 13.
One he engaged in, the other was a complete disaster and caused a lot of problems in the home and school. It was abandoned very quickly.
You cannot 'mandate' it