AIBU to be horrified by the Stolen Children of England

[LivingOnTheDancefloor]

I just watched a French documentary called "England's stolen children" and can't believe this is happening in England. Horrifying, scary, unbelievable, it is like a horror movie...

Basically, social services are taking babies from their parents based on suspicion that abuse might happen in the future, except that the decision is made based on ridiculous things.
A lady had her three children taken from her, including a breastfed baby because she went to the ER for a child's broken ankle and they judged that he must have been beaten by his parents (only based on the ankle). X years later the parents manage to prove the fracture was due to scorbut. And they found out the initial report from the ER says "no sign of fracture".
The judge admitted they shouldn't have taken the children and the parents were innocents. But the children were given to adoption so the parents will never see them again.
That is just one of the stories.
Some women are told while pregnant that their newborn will be taken as soon as he arrives (and thzney do it).
The documentary says it is due to the facts that counties have to reach a number of children given to adoption so they target poor/uneducated parents and find any reason to take their children.
And as fostering costs money to the state they prefer adoption.

AIBU to ask if you heard about it here in the UK? And if yes, what do you think? Could it be true or are they exagerating?

I am really shaken.

www.google.fr/amp/s/researchingreform.net/2016/11/14/englands-stolen-children-controversial-new-documentary-on-forced-adoption/amp/?client=safari

Sorry, no idea how to post links, and I am on my phone

littlemiss

So, out of interest what happens to children who are victims of parental neglect, cruelty, sexual, physical or emotional abuse in France? Is there a social services system in France? Do such children get left with their parents, or fostered or put into children's homes? Do any French children get adopted?

My sister asked me about this after watching the documentary on French TV a couple of weeks ago...She was surprised I wasn't aware of it.
I tried to explain that it wasn't possible without a court order and she didn't believe me.
Its very damaging!! The documentary says so people believe it.

I would certanily support no adoption, just long term fostering so that injustices can be undone and children returned to birth families in cases like that mentioned in the first post. Adoption is too final.

EnormousTiger, how would you feel as an abused child knowing that you are in a placement that could be terminated tomorrow so that you could be moved on to other foster parents or sent back to your abusive parent? Children, particularly children who have been abused or neglected, are entitled to certainty and to know that their parents are their parents forever, not just till the end of the foster placement.

I would also support fewer children taken away from families even if that means more are damaged.

Why? You really need to explain how this could ever be justifiable.

It seems France have two legal forms of adoption. One of them doesn't sever the legal relationship to birth family.

What's French for bollocks?

Would "tas de merde" be appropriate phraseology for any message to the programme makers?

Not read the whole thread but no, Social Services don't take children away for no good reason. There has to be a very good reason and we have to apply to the courts before it can happen. I dispair at how ill informed some members of society are about social services.

Spero I will have a look at the links, thank you.

I don't know about other countries, but in France they don't do "forced" adoptions.
It might have changed since then, but my DDad's parents were judged "unable to parent", he couldn't be adopted as his parents were still alive and not willing to give him up so he became "child of the state" (not sure about the translation, in French "pupille de la Nation") meaning the state was responsible for him.

I would also support fewer children taken away from families even if that means more are damaged. It is a difficult call however for our society

Not really no. Just for you it seems.

Well that's a system run for adults then isn't it and not child centred!

All children deserve a stable loving home not some state sponsored half way house.

If birth parents can't or won't step up then others need to be found.

So did that mean foster parents, OP? Were they able to provide him with permanent foster parents who gave him a stable home throughout his childhood?

The background in England is that surveys in recent years have shown that many children in foster care do badly, partly no doubt because they have been left too long with their birth families and suffered trauma, partly because there is a severe shortage of suitable longterm foster families, partly because attention to the wishes of the birth families mean that children keep being brought back when there is even a slight chance that the parents might cope- and then it goes pear-shaped again. There is good reason to believe that being shunted between foster families or between home and foster families is damaging. There have also been some highly publicised cases of children being murdered or severely physically and emotionally damaged by non-intervention.

There are some great foster families out there doing great work. But there aren't enough of them to go round.

OP do you think French culture puts considerably more emphasis on heredity and family of origin across the board than UK culture? So that there's a gap in cultural understanding anyway?

The thing that depresses me about the Joseph/Hemming advice to move abroad is that, for a family fighting an unjustified child protection case, it means effectively putting a massive great weapon into their opponents' hands. Nothing shrieks guilt more than running away.

LivingOnTheDancefloor

This thing about birth parents not being able to get children backhow long exactly do you think a child should wait for there parents to get there shit together

As Somone who fostered and adopted I can tell you a lot of children would pretty much waiting there whole child hood the thing is most chaotic parents have periods of stability but the birth parent and there capacity though out the children's lives what use to happen in the 90s Ect when adoption rates were lower if the children would just boomerang between parents and foster carers

Most birth parents I ever dealt with are on ther 5th 6 or even 7th children often removed by Diffrent councils who came to the same conclusion it's so complex the children's needs become complex due to the abuse and neglect the parent you seek to return the child to so even if the parent did become less chaotic due to the child's now needs they still may not be able to parent the child

Spero! I knew you would come. Thanks for the links and your balanced views. I am a big believer in the fact this is an imperfect system which needs change. However, the damage done by Joseph, Heming, Brooker et al is truly outrageous- they should be taken to task for the awful damage they cause.

My best mate adopted her son after fostering him for nearly two years from the age of 18 months. Social services tried to keep him with his mother, then tried to maintain contact whilst he was being fostered, but she decided that drugs and her violent boyfriend were more important than her child, who she persistently neglected.

My friend adopted him because she wanted him to have a loving, stable home after everything he'd been through. He's now a lovely, smart and much loved little lad.

Adoption is being -pushed- encouraged because it's cheaper than foster care. It's why this government is so in favour.

However, it also has benefits in stability for the children.

Good to see Spero posting on here. If anyone knows their stuff around these issues, Spero does.

Where's your evidence for the 'pushing' of adoption giraffessay?

Restless, I can't give you links to documents, but adoption has for years been seen as preferable to fostering as it offers more permanence and is cheaper.
Some campaigning was underway about two/three years ago to recognise long term fostering is in some circumstances a better option. I don't know how that fared though, as I left the field. There was also a pilot underway to place babies (from homes where they were unlikely to be returned) straight into fostering to adopt placements, in order to minimise disruption for the child. This is very tricky, as the carers attach even more than foster carers do, and the loss can be devastating.

I would agree with giraffe. I know of several very sad adoption breakdowns, that have occurred because adoption was simply not the right thing for that child. The government encourages it though, because it's cheaper then long term fostering.

Nothing to do with this forced adoption rubbish though!

Our current government do see adoption as gold standard. You can thank Gove for that. Cost is one reason for this. However most people who work with looked after children recognise that adoption is not a 'fits all solution' and my kids thrive in fostering or other forms of care.

Some not my*

corythatwas He didn't go to a foster family, possibly because he was already 10 or so. Child home, then they helped him find an apprentiship and he managed to get the state to allow him to study for a degree. He says it was very hard living in the child home, and he was jealous of the other children who left to be adopted as he knew he couldn't

manumission
Yes I believe there is cultural difference.. This could also play in how such documentary are received by the French public.