To be really upset and angry that social services won't let a loving family adopt?

[neroli38]

NC'ed for this

I've wanted to adopt for a while and my DH is very on board.

We have everything to give a child - a big home with their own room, good schools, we have enough money to give a child everything they could possibly need. But most importantly, we have bucket loads of love and support to give

We have a 2 year old daughter, 3 in March. We both thought the best thing would be to adopt a child aged maybe 5-8. For several reasons, we don't have a burning desire to do the baby stage again and we would be happy to skip it, but we know older children get overlooked for adoption. Our new child would be in school, so I could still work part time and we wouldn't be losing much money. It fits in with the ages of our neighbours and friends children, so our new child would have lots of playmates

We thought that January would be a good time to start, so I phoned our local council up yesterday to make contact. I spoke to a social worker who asked us some questions about ourselves but then told me that because we have a 2 year old daughter, we can't adopt now. We can't adopt an older child full stop, only a child younger than our DD. We have to wait until our DD is 4 years old, then we can start the adoption process for a baby aged 0-2

I'm just really upset and a bit angry. Apparently they're crying out for parents but here we are, we have everything to give an older child - a world of love, a little sister who is lovely and we know would adore an older sibling, a nice house, private schools and lovely holidays and anything else else you could care to name

And we're not good enough, bcause of our DD. Why is that a problem??

AIBU? Are social services BU?

SS have made their rules regarding age because of experience of what works
We waited until our BS was 9 before we adopted and the changes we have made to our lives would not be for everyone

We had a lovely SW who was very honest. When we were being assessed we said no to sexual abuse because of our BS and she said ' you do realise you could get a child who has been sexually abused don't you, because they may not have disclosed at that stage'

That is true of anything you say you can't cope with
Our AD needs so much attention and supervision it would not be possible to have a younger child in the home
She has an attachment disorder (something we said no to and not diagnosed). She cannot be trusted with animals and I would never leave her unsupervised with young children
We have internal locks on our doors and the windows are always locked because she has no awareness of danger
We can go to very few places on holiday because she cannot cope with change

Babies are born with brains not fully developed and continue to develop after birth. How they develop depends on them getting the appropriate love and nurture. A lot of adopted children will have a tough start before birth due to drug and alcohol abuse
My DD has made great progress but it is a long hard slog very worthwhile of course but the toughest thing I have ever done

Hang on, OP had some other questions

what does sexualised behaviour mean

It covers a big range of things. For instance - on one end, a child who uses sexual language, or acts in a provocative manner towards adults or other children, or a child who might simulate sexual acts using toys, or more seriously, a child who tries to touch or do something sexual with adults or other children. Quite a few other things as well, but those are just a few examples

We talk about children being 'sexualised' (meaning, having awareness of sexual things beyond their years) when they have been exposed to anything sexual and have absorbed it. A child might be sexualised but might not have very sexualised behaviour if that makes sense

is the average age 3/4?

It was 3 last time I checked, but that doesn't mean there aren't any babies available for adoption. There are actually quite a few 0-2 year olds waiting for adoption

x-post, oops

OP. I think you have been given good advice, and you seem to have taken it on board. I think maybe you didn't express yourself very well originally, which has made some people be harder on you.

One of the problems with adopting, is that although not all older children have major emotional or behavioural issues, it is not always clear which children will and which won't, there are no guarantees. Sometimes children 'present' in foster care differently from how they then react in a 'forever' family. Furthermore, although SS try to tell you as much as they can about the child's history, they won't know everything, and some stuff only comes out later.

We have been extremely lucky with our DDs, aged 8 and 2 when placed. BUT DD1 has definitely been 'harder' because of the emotional upheaval she's had to go through, and the fact that she had years of neglect which can never fully be overcome I don't think. Sometimes she knows stuff in her brain, but she just doesn't feel it in her heart.

My db had probably had a far less traumatic start in life than any older child you are likely to adopt these days: taken into care at birth, appears to have been well cared for in foster home/orphanage, no known abuse, no alcohol or drugs, and adopted before age 3.

The lack of damage showed in the way he was able to fit into normal family life, had the knowledge of a normally developing toddler his age, was physically well and healthy and had clearly learnt how to relate to other people. And has got on well with relationships and jobs later in life.

Even so, he had days when he would go into violent meltdowns for no reason at all and hit and kick and bite anything that got near him. I'd say almost certainly trauma (and later noticed something very similar in my own dd who was traumatised by health issues). Not a major problem as we were all bigger and stronger than him, but I could imagine it would have been totally scary (and actually very dangerous) if any of us had been younger than him.

He was certainly not a feral child (what a nasty term!): he was well behaved, polite to strangers, did well at school and was very loving at home. But he did have days when he was totally overwhelmed and we had to be able to deal with those.

Yes I do see now why social services won't let us adopt an older child. As I said I would never want to put my DD at risk. I know I can't handle a child who is violent or has issues with sex abuse, I just couldn't do it

It is entirely possible that you might adopt a child who presents with signs of suffering sexual abuse months after being placed with you... No clue before this. Bear that in mind. What will You do then?

In your course to being approved to adopt you will go through things far 'worse' than being told you can't adopt out of birth order.

The best piece of advice you've been given is start researching now. Spend a lot of time on adoption boards, both here and on adoption uk to learn about the process and the children. You are naive at the moment... But then we all were at the beginning

I was feeling a bit emotional when I started the thread, because that was our hope and plan, and it was upsetting to be told no, and I didn't understand why not, so I felt it was unfair. The social worker did not tell me why they had this rule, she ended the conversation after saying we could come back in 2 years time. I understand she was probably very busy, but if she's had the time to explain why they had this rule, it would have been helpful

Feral wasn't the best word, I'm sorry for saying it, I couldn't think of a better one on the spot

You will get further in life if rather than flying into a rant because you don't get what you want, you consider the other point of view first.

I was feeling a bit emotional when I started the thread, because that was our hope and plan, and it was upsetting to be told no, and I didn't understand why not, so I felt it was unfair. The social worker did not tell me why they had this rule, she ended the conversation after saying we could come back in 2 years time. I understand she was probably very busy, but if she's had the time to explain why they had this rule, it would have been helpful

Feral wasn't the best word, I'm sorry for saying it, I couldn't think of a better one on the spot

Sometimes, SS don't explain themselves very well.

Honestly... Introduce yourself on some adoption boards (especially MN). The (mainly) ladies on there will help you more than you will ever know and are the most supportive people I've ever encountered

Come say hi.

You will get further in life if rather than flying into a rant because you don't get what you want, you consider the other point of view first.

Woah Nelly...

She was upset and frustrated and venting.

Sometimes that's ok, you know... Especially since 'the other point of view' is often hard to see when it comes to the adoption process.

OP

It is good that you have posted and are getting some helpful posts to think about. I would too suggest that you spend some time on the adoption boards over the next year or so - I would suggest the experience will be highly beneficial.

However I would like to add that having a younger child will not necessarily mean that the child will be any less distressed / dysfunctional or will have any less 'behavioural problems'. All children in care have been through a tremendous amount of trauma - some of which would have had a significant impact on their attachments. This book is fantastic and easy (ish) to read and I would recommend that you read it to gain an understanding off Abuse, neglect and attachment.

Good luck

I think it's interesting that the response of "younger than the child you already have, so that the child's place in the family isn't changed". And them wanting to wait until the child's 4yo.

I would have thought that it could be just as much, if not more traumatic, for the youngest child to be surplanted, and if you were doing it then better to do it younger rather than older. But that's my opinion.

What does spring to mind is a childminding friend. She once said that she found childminding a child older than hers quite difficult. Because if there was an incident (eg they bumped heads, with equal effect) where they both needed attention, then her natural instinct was to go to the younger, however as a child minder she felt she should go to the minded child as she knew hers better and could tell quicker how hurt they were. Maybe it's a bit of that.

I suspect once thing they're trying to stop is people thinking "oh it'd be nice for my dc to have a big brother/sister to look up to". I remember not on here, but on another board someone had a single boy aged about 4-5. She decided (not in this country) she wanted to adopt siblings, one older, one younger than hers, one boy one girl.
I remember people saying to her that it was a bad idea because that took all her ds' "specialness" away in one go.
He would be not the oldest, not the youngest, not an only boy...
In the discussion it became quite clear that her idea was not to give a home, but more to give her boy the experience of having a bigger sibling, a smaller sibling, a brother, a sister. She said her ideal was older sister (so she could mother him) and younger brother (but very close in age so they could play together). It was more like her planning special toys for him than viewing them as children.

Not saying that is, in any way, the OP's case, but I thought that might give her an idea on something they're trying to stop.

We'd like to foster some day. Only thing is we need a spare room, and I'm not convinced moving the girls in together to provide a spare room is a good idea. If we came into money (unlikely!!) that would be one of the first things we'd do though.

I think it's completely understandable that you were feeling upset at being told you couldn't adopt when you really hoped to do that

As the others said, matching involves a lot of considerations, they will have your homestudy report (the assessment you do) to look at, a lot of information about the child, they will meet you, have meetings with lots of social workers and professionals etc. They will consider many things, as each child needs something very different - one child might need a single parent who lives a long way from the birth family and will use special parenting techniques, another might need a couple with one stay at home parent, another needs a parent/s with an understanding of attachment issues, there's ethnicity, age, behaviour, contact with siblings or birth parents, etc. Lots goes into it

I definitly think you should come over to the adoption boards and say hi! We won't bash you, we want to support and give you information. We point you to good resources and reading, we can talk about our own experiences etc, and you can much more information about what adopting is like nowadays and the waiting children.

It's true that younger children are also traumatised and also often have varying issues. But there's important advantages to the traumatised child being the baby of the family

The reason 'they' dont like / dont let you foster / adopt children older then your own is simple. If the foster/adopted child turns out to be a sexual predator / violent / a bully etc .. an older child is less likely to be a target or be led by a young child.

I think it's interesting that the response of "younger than the child you already have, so that the child's place in the family isn't changed". And them wanting to wait until the child's 4yo. I would have thought that it could be just as much, if not more traumatic, for the youngest child to be surplanted, and if you were doing it then better to do it younger rather than older. But that's my opinion

Well, an only child is going to be supplanted whatever age child was adopted! The new sibling could be a baby or an older 10 year old, and either way they've lost their place as "sole child and winner of undivided parental attention". But much better for them to be around a younger child, than an older one who is bigger and stronger (so the risk to the younger child), might have challenging behaviour the younger child will copy, and so on

The reason 'they' dont like / dont let you foster / adopt children older then your own is simple. If the foster/adopted child turns out to be a sexual predator / violent / a bully etc .. an older child is less likely to be a target or be led by a young child.

Nope. Try again.

It's anything but simple. That may be one reason. It's far from being the reason

Stop scaremongering.

OP, for the sake of any potential children you might be lucky enough to adopt I suggest you spend the next year or so learning all you can about children who have been in care and how it can affect their whole lives and how it never ever goes away. Money, holidays, etc etc mean fuck all if you don't have the support you need and the understanding you need to progress with your life and have the best you can.

Adoption can be quite confusing. You were venting, it's allowed! I would agree, come over to the adoption board, I'm not on there, but had a quick peek, it looks very friendly! Everyone uses wrong words, gets wrong ends of sticks and so on.

I've got to know quite a few families with older children either because we live in the same area or through support groups etc, and whilst agression is pretty common, sexual behaviour is less so. I think a part of it is that if sexual behaviour has shown up by school age, most prospective adopters have it on their 'no' list, and these children are more likely stay in long term foster care. On the other hand, whilst you can say no to known behaviour, you can't guaruntee a child will never show it, nor can you guaruntee that if you say no to a history of sexual abuse, you definitely won't adopt a child with a history of sexual abuse, because it's not obvious, and it's not common at all for a child to come into care solely or largely because of sexual abuse. It's hidden and relies on the child making a disclosure which they may not feel safe enough to do for many years

The age gap rules are for many reasons, issues of safety is jut one part of it, and there are lots of other equally important reasons - attention, the adoptive child getting enough time with their parents etc. All very important

I take objection to calling the children 'sexual predators' by the way. That's a term to use about older teenagers and adults, not, say, a 5-10 year old who has been through abuse and is 'acting it out'. In my experience, quite a lot of children who are sexually abused at a young age end up having sexualised behaviour, which can include trying to touch other children etc, including much younger children, but that does not make them 'predators'. Most of them will stop doing it by the time they reach teenagerhood and adulthood. Labelling a confused young child who doesn't think it's wrong to hurt another child in that way, a 'predator' is going too far

neroli well done for considering everything that's been said. You've entered a world that is so wildly different from the image we get in the press.

I hope that you can find a way forward which fits your family and a child in need of a forever home.