to think giving back your child because he turns out to be disabled is wrong?

[colourfulmummy]

This storey just didn't sit right with me, I thought well its the daily mail it might not be true but then saw it on her web site in her own words. It's all me, myself and I... poor me what I had to go through? what about the child? surely every parent knows anything can happen. How can someone be a child's parent for two years and then totally walk away and then expect to adopt another child?

www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-2986483/Mother-reveals-gave-adopted-toddler.html#readerCommentsCommand-message-field

adoptiondisruptionuk.com/about/

It's absolutely none of your business, or your place to say if it is right or wrong. You are privy to a few mere details that have been twisted by the media to make the story more sensational and newsworthy.

I don't think anyone is in a position to judge this woman. I'm sure it wasn't a decision made lightly.

She sounds like someone complaining about her consumer rights being breached.

The child would,have been better served if the social workers had been honest with the prospective adoptive parents. From what I have read, he had much greater developmental delay than she was told.

A child with his problems needs a parent or parents who can cope with the demands of looking after him - and he is not going to get that if the prospective parents are not told the whole truth. Both the adoptive mum and the child were let down, imo.

I am afraid I am unable to comment. It is a remarkable, unique situation and I think the most important concern is that a small child's needs are met in the best possible way.

Yabu

I did read the DM story. She said at the start that she couldn't take on the responsibility of a child with a disability because she was on her own, but it doesn't sound like she spent enough time with the little boy before she finally brought him home.
He's now with a family and has 4 full time carers (presumably members of the family) and she'd like to adopt another child?

She does come across as a bit "Poor Me" her dream of motherhood flawed and shattered.

I'm an adoptive parent (as well as a birth parent) and I refuse to judge this woman for the decision she reached. The level and quality of post-adoption support in most parts of the country is shockingly poor, and disruption is not uncommon - in large part because of this IMHO.

YABU.

It isn't about her, is it?

She was unable to cope with the care of the child. The child needs round the clock care, and she was unable to provide that.

The important thing was that the child received the care he needed, and that is what they tried to achieve.

From the article...

Claire said she felt she had no option but to call social workers who she said agreed with medics that he could no longer be cared for at home

That sound like the professionals were of the opinion that his condition was beyond the limits of a single person caring for him in his own home.

At least here there are strictly applied structures for when an adoption breaks down.

The stories from America of kids being handed over to unvetted, complete stranger via a sort of "unwanted adopted children Craig's List" made me want to weep.

I think unless you've been through what she has and have experience of either adoption and/or parenting a child with severe disabilities, you have little right to judge.

70, how long do you think adopters spend with children before bringing them home? You make it sound like adopters are able to engage in some sort of 'try before you buy' scheme.

This story was in another newspaper which was far kinder to her.

I think it is a 'there by the grace of god go I'. It sounds like it was a terrible situation to be in and that the little boy's problems were far greater than she was made aware of. It's also obviously a problem in adoptions and needs to be looked at - so for that I applaud her bravery in bringing the issue to light.

I can't even begin to judge her as I haven't been in her position. Neither have you.

Buxtonstill - she has gone to a national paper and set up a website promoting what she did so obviously people will discuss it.

My daughter has developmental delay (although nothing comparable to that poor little boy) it is fecking hard going. She didn't sign up too the work that goes with a disabled child.

I feel sorry for both of them tbh.

I'm not about to sit in judgement on her - I can't imagine it was an easy decision but it's probably the best one

I think she was not told the truth about how bad the little boy's problems were - if she had been, she would not have adopted him and this would not have happened. It sounds as if the professionals agree that he needed more care than she could provide alone, so I fail to see how this is in any way her fault. I very much doubt that she made the decision lightly, people seem to have been very quick to judge her.

It's difficult to judge. On the one hand, adoptive parents are supposed to be in all ways the same as biological parents and if her biological son had suddenly been diagnosed with epilepsy and brain damage then she wouldn't be able to 'hand him back'.

On the other hand, a severely disabled child is a huge commitment and it's better for the welfare of the child for him to go back into care if needs can be better met in a residential facility, as seems to be the case now with this boy. It's good to know that he is being taken care of now at least.

set up a website promoting what she did so obviously people will discuss it.

I think promote is fairly unkind way of phrasing it.

She's set up a website to talk about something which is rarely discussed, even within adoption circles sometimes, to support people going through adoption disruption.

It needs discussing, Colourfulmummy, because adoptions DO break down, unfortunately for all involved.

Should these people be shamed because there is a breakdown? Or should more care be exercised in making sure adoptive parents have enough support - especially when there may be undiagnosed medical problems. I can't imagine being in the impossible position she, and other adoptive parents, were put in.

Was originally incensed after reading that article. However, after thinking about it, I think the woman was put in an incredibly difficult situation. Financially she had planned for a child she would be more than capable of supporting. The reality was she wouldn't have been able to support the child without benefits etc, and even then it would be a struggle to get by. She felt she couldn't do it and probably felt there were other people who could provide him with a better future. Broke my heart though to read he called her mummy. Truly a horrible situation.

cracker I know someone who adopted siblings and after the approval and being introduced to the children they spent months having meetings at the Foster Parents home then taking them out , then having them stay overnight then weekends, before the final moving in.

So I do know it's not like buying something and sending it back

Gosh, what a horrible OP. She didn't give him back at all. Social workers agreed he couldn't be cared for!

70 for your friend maybe, but that's highly unusual. It's normally 7-10 days... And there may be only a couple of hours contact on the first two days. Ts really not that long at all.

It's