To think that women should not be encouraged to be human incubators

[HengshanRoad]

In regard to the new "adoption tsar" Martin Narey's idea that women who have unwanted pregancies should be encouraged to carry the baby to term and give it up for adoption at birth.

I've given this a lot of thought (having been adopted at 6 months old myself) and I can't help feeling uncomfortable and a little angry at the thought of women being used as incubators for babies. Giving up a child for adoption is an enormous trauma - commensurate with, if not greater than, an abortion. It creates a birth mother who has relinquished a baby as well as a child who has been given up. As an adoptee myself, clearly I'm glad that I was carried to term and not aborted, but if I hadn't been, I would never have known, IYSWIM...

It just seems a little "Handmaid's Tale" to me. A so called "adoption tsar" like Martin Narey should understand adoption and it's many issues more than he seems to.

'all options - keeping, adoption, and termination should be considered, but by the woman only. No one else is entitled to voice an opinion'
.. really.Do you believe the mother 'owns' the foetus then ?? .what about the father, the child is just as much his? And what about the unborn child itself.The one most directly affected? Who speaks up for him/her?

This is just going to become one big fight club though because there is a fundamental difference between people on whether a foetus is a life or a bunch of cells.And while those opposing views are held each side (pro-life, pro-choice cannot help but seeing the other as being unreasonable)
For me I am pro-life and apart from in cases where the mother's life is at risk I would be most strongly against abortion.

I agree with those who say the stigma needs to be removed from women choosing adoption.

It seems odd that we now have the situation where most think that women have a right to termination without vilification (and I count myself in that 'most') but if a woman chooses to go through the physical and mental effort of bringing that pregnancy to term but allowing a willing family to bring up the child she gives birth to then she is judged and scorned.

I would like to see a wider range or options available such as open adoptions with a wide scale of contact from letters to more of a shared care being possible depending on what all parties wish.

perfectstorm, have a look at the Epicure study. Your figures are wrong. Something like 3% of babies born at 24 weeks survive with no longterm disability, a further 7% with only mild disability, 4% with moderate disability and 5% with severe disability . Sadly, the majority will still die in intensive care or the delivery room.

RE open adoption. Isn't fostering used as a temporary solution?

The fostering proces can go on for years, so it isn't always 'temporary', you could have a situation where the GP's take the child, birth parents get back on their feet, child returned, birth parents fail, child back to GP's, GP health declines, child with another family member, family member has change, child back in foster care, foster carer ill, child removed to different short term foster carer, Birth parents ok again, child returned, birth parents fail, foster care etc.

Sorry but these cxaes exsist.

SS could go for adoption, court won't allow it, family steps in, that doesn't work, child in foster care, DM re-housed, child back, neglect happens for three years, worked with by SS, we then have a messed up 'hard to place' six year old.

Considering much of what Narey has to say is promoting the speeding up of adoption proceedures for children already in the care of the Local Authority, I'm expecting JohnHemming to come by any minute to talk about 'child snatchers'

I don't think that anyone working in the field doesn't agree that the correct procedure and criteria needs to come first, i have stated my concern with the setting of targets.

M Narey has vast experience working in this field, he knows what gaps need to be plugged, most people went to work for Banardo's because they felt that the system under the LA CP benefited no one, so i have faith that he has good intentions behind his suggestions.

Sorry, re-read my post and reads as if I am not supporting what Narey has to say.

Having worked in Social Work for 15 years, I think he is spot-on, but it will all come back down to misrepresentation of 'targets', and the needs of children getting lost in the political fight.

Its also in danger of taking advantage of vunerable women, who should be recieving support, not pressure, i didn't like the use of 'encourage'.

OP, I agree with you. Women are not human incubators and they have every right to decide what to do with their bodies. More importantly, as a child who was abandoned by her father at birth, I can tell you that knowledge kills. Had my mother abandoned me as well I never would have recovered from that blow. Given a choice between being given up for adoption or being aborted, I prefer the latter. Its a myth that all children in adoption homes are taken in by nice, loving families. If only. Some of them grow up to the age of 10, 13, 15 or more with the knowledge that their families did not want them. They wait for someone to take them in and in many cases that never happens. Its not like some sappy movie- its harsh, cold reality. I would never give my child up. I'd make bloody sure I didn't get pregnant until I was ready. If I did, I'm afraid I'd rather abort (before 2months, before the nervous system develops) than abandon my child. Its a horrible situation to be in

I just happen to have the report from yesterday's Times here.

This is what he says:
"I believe that a woman with an unwanted pregnancy should be able to consider all three options, including going to term and giving up her baby for adoption. Pregnancy advisory charities, children's charities, and local authorities need to highlight that third option better. I have hesitated to express this view, so easy is it for it to be caricatured as an attack on abortion. So I need to stress that I am, emphatically, in the pro-choice camp when it comes to abortion. But a woman with an unwanted pregnancy, who at least wants to explore the adoption option, should not be discouraged from doing so."

This is after a section of the report where he investigates what the various pregnancy advisory charities and local authorities say about adoption - generally unhelpful and discouraging - with a more supportive attitude from Planned Parenthood in the US.

The bulk of the report is taken up with his recommendations for speeding up adoptions and making it a more viable option for children in care - this is just a small part of it. In particular - what really stood out for me - is his focus on the needs of the child and how these are always paramount - as opposed to some current practice that wants to balance the needs of the child with the needs of the parent.

HTH

Seenbutnotheard - John Hemming responded in a letter to today's Times:

"Our care system is out on a limb. It has particularly negative outcomes for the children that go through it. People recognise that other systems, such as those in Denmark, have better outcomes. Those, however, are more supportive of the birth family. Our system already is very anti-birth family and Mr Narey is recommending a step further away."

bumbleymummy

he child I have been caring for has been in care for nearly 6 years because the courts are still hopping ss can sort her out they are not magic men and can only offer support if the parents won't take it then.

Foster care is supposed to be a stop gap but the reality is like bird says parents sort them selves out for a short time child gose back then something happens child is removed mum has another baby with yet a diffrent bloke mum leaves bloke meets new man things are good child gose back mum pregnant again all 3 get removed somthing happens and children literally spend their whole child hood in this cycle because the court won't allow the child to be removed from the start even though ss could basically wrtie the story of how its going to end

Its very diffcult to change a life time of chaotic lifestyle and the indactors are that it can take years for a drug addict to get clean, or an abutiual offender to turn straight.

Children can spend years or in some cases their whole childhood waiting for their parents to get clean

Their are plenty of carers who have had children for 12 years Ect because the courts waited so long for the parent to get better and when they would finally consider adoption either the child was to old, or to traumatised by their parent or too attached to the foster family it would be cruel to move them

My view certain types of abuse action should be the first and only thought

I have a completely different view on adoption to DancingWind, and I was abandoned/given up for adoption. But, I was adopted very young by a nice, loving family and never experienced that sense of being unwanted - I was very much wanted by my adopted family. I'm not trying to negate what's been said, but for every story of an adoption that's gone 'wrong' there's probably one that's gone 'right'.

I don't know, as I don't work in the field, but I would imagine that today there are many more children being damaged by being kept with unsuitable birth families too long than there were in the 70s by being adopted. As with many areas of life it is the 'horror' story that gets the most attention, and the normal, everyday gets overlooked to some extent. Just my opinion though.

Treats if out system was any more biased toward the abusive /neglectful parents I would vomit

They already call the shots you even have some parents who demand the council pay them to have contact with their own child and you guessed it they get it as well john hemming is a twat and should be slapped with a wet fish

Barnado's, as you probably all know, operates the scheme to re-unite DC's with birth parents, and there are plenty of success stories as M Narey will have handled.

YABU.

have you read the report? not the DM version, but the report itself? he says he wants it presented as an option. presently, as i understand, if a woman asks about adoption as an option at her counselling interview, they often aren't able to explain how it would work.

it's not about forcing people to listen to something they don't want to, like what the anti abortion lobby in the US want to achieve. it's about having information available for women who might be interested in discussing it.

for the record, i'm pro choice AND adopted. i think the whole issue has been misreported in the mainstream press, except for the times.

I thought about this once very seriously and came to the conclusion that I just couldn't put my child up for adoption and depending on the stage of pregnancy (I personally believe there is a point when a foetus becomes a child but that is not at conception), I would rather have an abortion.

I could deal with the responsibility of knowing I chose to have an abortion, but not the responsibility of having a child out there that I 'gave up' to someone else or the system. It would drive me insane knowing I had this part of myself out there and even thinking about it now makes me feel heartbroken.

What if my child was unhappy and needed help or guidance and I couldn't do anything? What if he or she wanted to know me or wanted to know who he or she looked like and where they came from? So many more intricate things like this make me feel that I would much rather not 'give up' a child in a manner such as adoption. Selfish maybe, but I couldn't deal with it. I would most likely want my baby back and what if it were too late?

Maybe I am looking at this very simplistically but thats how I feel. I would rather no baby than a baby lost to me but living somewhere.

just read the posts above which go into the wider issues raised in the report, and i can say that i wholeheartedly agree with the report's recommendations about reducing the amount of time in care, putting the focus onto the child and not the parent and retraining social workers about the primacy of the birth family, in the cases where the birth family are not able to care for the child. i

t's about time the best interests of the child were considered, as the damage can be considerable even before the child is a year old. i have some experience of this in my family and feel very strongly about it.

there are definitely more families who would love to adopt a baby than babies available. I think right now there are virtually no adoptions done at birth in this country, apart from the odd surrogacy, etc. For a woman with an unwanted pregnancy contemplating her choices this could very well be the best option - to know her child will be received by a family who desperately want it and who have been screened by professionals. Abortion is not right for everyone, and carrying the child to term also gives the woman an additional option - she can ultimately decide to keep the child.

Oh and from personal experience of knowing many kids in care while growing up, I would never choose it unless I was in absolute certainty of it being a temporary situation. And if you ever do find yourself in a situation where you have to put your child in care, can you ever be sure it is temporary.