AIBU to want to carry on this interesting discussion about the Child Protection System?

[Spero]

Following on from this www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2792849-AIBU-to-be-horrified-by-the-Stolen-Children-of-England?

I thought it was interesting. Some people didn't agree with me and said they would tell me why. I would like to hear their views.

I don't think anyone is saying it's impossible - just rare.

The vetting is exhaustive however if agree adopters often do not have realistic ideas about what is going to be like. But I think that is the reality of having children whether biologically or through adoption.

From the adoption breakdowns I've witnessed it has always been when the children have reached teenage years and have become more rebellious and the parents have stated they can no longer cope. Of course I haven't witnessed many adoption breakdowns, but from my analysis I'd suggest that nobody can predict how early trauma can manifest itself within a child and often there are no signs of any 'harm' until the child reaches their teens.

Special children need outstanding parents. Very few people are capable of being super human parents. Adoptive parents need more support. There is also a nature aspect. Perhaps there is a genetic reason why people grow up to be mentally unhinged.

I suspect child abuse occasionally happens when people are put under more pressure than they have the skills to cope with. Adoptive parents need or even birth parents are not necessarily inherently evil. There are levels if child abuse and what consitutes child abuse is subjective in area like neglect or emotional child abuse.

Leanback - thanks, yes I know Karen Broadhurst, she is ace. I have been to some of her presentations about mothers in re-current care proceedings which have been funded by the Nuffield.
Which is why I was so surprised that they didn't fund Louise Tickle - seems right up their alley.
I will make a list of people to contact over Christmas and she will be on it!

SP

One of the saddest cases of adoption breakdown was the Re K case, which suesspicious minds blogged about suesspiciousminds.com/2012/12/31/the-case-i-am-most-pleased-about-this-year/

the parents in this case were accused of harming the child and treated with great suspicion by the professionals. Eventually the court got an expert in who said they had done the best they could and his heart went out to them. The child had a reactive attachment disorder and was very hard to parent. The court agreed finally to make the child a ward of court; the LA had wanted a care order on the basis that the adoptive parents had caused significant harm.

I agree it seems common that the really serious problems often don't manifest itself until the teenage years - I assume its a combination of swirling hormones and a child being physically big enough to resist being made to do anything.

"Special children need outstanding parents".

Do you think phrases like this put undue pressure on potential adoptive and adoptive parents though? Sorry if this is not the appropriate thread to explore this.

Thank you to everyone who answered my questions. I wish the other thread hadn't been deleted as I am unsure where this conversation started but would like to know the background and what was said previously.

OnMountains - the thread that got deleted hadn't really got going, it got removed very quickly!

It was meant to be a follow on from this one www.mumsnet.com/Talk/am_i_being_unreasonable/2792849-AIBU-to-be-horrified-by-the-Stolen-Children-of-England?

Spero Thanks - will go read now. I have just got your PM but it's not letting me reply. I've noted the details and will get in contact shortly off mumsnet - thank you.

"Special children need outstanding parents".

Do you think phrases like this put undue pressure on potential adoptive and adoptive parents though? Sorry if this is not the appropriate thread to explore this.

Adoptive and foster parents are often under undue pressure because of lack of support. Services to help children with additional needs/ psychological issues have been cut to the bone. Rather than criticise people who are doing their best surely it's best to look at why long term foster placements/ adoption break down.

I wonder if some of the difference between the UK and the rest of Europe is to do with the Second World War and the aftermath? Certainly we had cities being bombed, children evacuated, families disrupted because of war service, but that was nothing like the reality over very large parts of Europe. And, of course, there’s been ongoing devastation ever since in some parts.

That could lead to a different attitude of, say, keeping a family together as the top priority, as well as much more experience of providing children’s homes for orphans or displaced children.

Although the war officially ended 71 years ago, maybe the experience of families and communities being brutally broken apart back then could lead, even now, to wanting to preserve those connections if it’s at all possible?

Prevention would be a better strategy than removal. I know there will always be a need for removals, but I think better prevention and focus on helping families would be more beneficial to everyone and reduce that need.

Interesting perspective icy front.

I have often wondered if it is because our sensibilities are more in tune with societies like the USA than Europe - more of a focus on individualism, less support for state benefits, desire for home ownership etc etc. So less willingness to support families and more tendency to 'punish' them for weakness.

But USA also very different because they seem to have a very established culture of women giving up babies, advertising on websites etc. I assume that is because USA has much less liberal attitudes towards abortion generally.

It would be a fascinating but massive research study!

You are ignoring the consumerist nature of adoption.

The USA's approach to adoption is so completely different it would certainly make for an interesting comparator.

We have had a number of minefields to navigate out here with our adopted DD, ranging from the weekly column in the Sunday paper featuring children looking for adoptive families, to the catalogue of children waiting to be adopted that was on display at a local furniture store (the owner does a lot for fostering and adoption services more generally, it wasn't just randomly placed there), to the adoptive parents we have met who talk glibly about how much they paid to adopt their DC. Also interesting is that there doesn't seem to be any kind of age limit - we frequently see 12-16 year olds being featured as looking for adoptive parents, which would be incredibly rare in the UK

Please explain why you view adoption to be consumerist?

Marking place.

Some children return to their birth family (usually mother) in their teens don't they? - when even though it is a terrible idea, and nothing much has changed about the mother, the child is too old in practical terms for social services to do anything about it.

george all though a care order lasts until a child is 18, if at 16 a child decides to return home there is not much a court or any local authority can do about it, you are correct.

You get to choose the child?

Don't get me wrong I have known parents who have taken on children with complex needs and worked very hard to make a success if it. I applaud and am humbled by them.

However my experience is in adoption breakdown. I would give examples but they are far too case specific to be cited on a discussion board but I've met adoptive parents I wouldn't leave my dog with let alone a child.

there is no other way for it to work though surely is there? Families have to ensure that they are the right fit for a child and the child is the right fit for their families. If children were 'assigned' then we would undoubtedly see more breakdowns than currently.

They being said some of the current recruitment techniques in adoption to lead me to feel uneasy.

everythingis - you don't really get to choose, it's not like shopping for a new TV.

First you are approved by a panel for a defined age range, and sometimes a boy or a girl (we were approved for a boy or girl aged 2-4, for example). Then when you are interested in a child your SW, the child's own SW and often the child's family finder SW have to agree that you are a good match. Then the decision to proceed to introductions has to be approved by another panel. So although there's is more of an element of choice than having a birth child, I wouldn't describe it as a consumerist process at all.

Leanback - can you say more about the recruitment aspects that make you uneasy? (I've occasionally rolled my eyes at posters that are designed to tug on the heart strings, as well as the ones featuring two lovely, happy children laughing as they play delightfully together)

Am always thinking of the aviation industry approach when pondering how SS works. There are so many panicked people working in the area that I can't see it ever working and it's such a shame because the judgements made are so difficult and so in need of analysis rather than judgement.

I have only ever seen very ordinary incompetence rather than anything sinister when it comes to adoption. The reality is that children are left in homes I wouldn't leave mine in for ten minutes. That this damages them and that they will pretty much always crave continuing their biological relationships is so hard to resolve.

olenna's though I've never experienced them myself, the new trend of 'activity days' does feel slightly like cattle being paraded in a market as far as I'm concerned. However I have worked with people who've attended and say they are great, so maybe one day I will be a convert.

I have no hands-on experience with adoption however I have recruited and assessed potential foster carers and many have no realistic expectations of what that role might entail. I had one guy sat 'could we not just get a nice 5-10 year old girl in with no issues'. I feel many of the advertisements for fostering and adoption recruitments feature happy children in the under ten age range who don't look like hey have a care in the world.

That being said I wish more people would choose adoption.

Some interesting letters published in response to Louise Tickle's Guardian piece about the Transparency Project's research into 'adoption targets' www.theguardian.com/society/2016/dec/14/targets-have-no-place-in-adoption-process?CMP=share_btn_link