Adoption with parental consent

[FakeUsername]

I hope to phrase this respectfully, and would be grateful for anyone with more insight and opposing views- I am not an expert. I am asking questions. To be clear, I certainly do not disagree with the idea of adoption in the case of relinquished children, or those with no one to care for them. Also I think adopters themselves are usually resilient people who do amazing jobs (often managing a lot of fall out from a poorly run system, for example adoption following inadequate support of a child over a long period). I’m also not into the weird stuff online about financial incentives for adoptions etc and don’t wish to echo individuals who say this.

I’m concerned that the process is sometimes flawed. That a secret court can split families without evidence that would be taken to a criminal court. That particularly emotional abuse cases have potential to be unsound. Or new evidence comes to light in an irreversible process. Is the risk acceptable, that children are removed without warrant for the sake of others. There could be a clause for maybe categories of physical abuse and criminal convictions of neglect or assault and therefore losing parental rights (eg a criminal conviction of abuse)- but most cases I believe don’t reach this. I’m not sure we are placing enough value in family structure and identity. Or maybe working with families to either adequately support them, or work towards a point of accepting the best route forward is adoption. Does the system have enough checks, and when does it become too secretive to be held to account.

Many families may either react poorly to professionals or have difficulty acting in court in a way that reflects parenting. The current system has few checks or recourse for when it goes wrong for families. Some families can present themselves in a way to the system that shields parents, others get lost in it. For example some women may speak culturally of events in a way seen as ‘minimising’ events, whereas another culturally speaks very openly to professionals. Both carry out the same actions.

I’d also question the links of poverty, budget cuts and adoption from families below the poverty line. If society is either directed towards a bias or families are facing additional struggles that break up units. That underfunded care systems can lead to more unsafe conclusions, strings of locum SW turning over in some departments creating holes in chronology and inconsistencies. We need to be very very very robust if we are to separate a family. Not a bitty system that can be unpredictable and act differently for the same issues.

Do we do enough to support care leavers, is it a cycle that can be broken?

Do we have higher numbers/ different practices from other countries and do we need to learn? Do we need to look at ourselves, track children better, listen to more stories? Are we too often placing children but not talking about disruptions or outcomes?

To me it seems a huge huge deal to separate a family forever (or childhood) and bar contact. A closed adoption, without contact, for every single case seems very difficultly. Disruption, where an adoption ends, is also an issue. If we have a fixed adoption that then breaks down due to a faulty system placing the family in an impossible situation the impact on children is HUGE.

Is there some element of a perception of punishing parents for actions? Do we ever lose focus on the child’s rights and future in the case ion how a mother may present and judgements made?

I won’t write an essay, but I’m happy to expand. As I said these are not views of an expert, if I cause offence I apologise, I hope for respectful dialogue (or being ignored which is also fine!). For transparency I have not had a child in care, these views mainly come from talking to a close friend who had a disrupted adoption/ lots of care places and returned to a (rather dysfunctional) mother and siblings as an adult for a relationship that is messy but carried on. Also from working with children in many stages in care. Are there many cases where contact with family and care would be appropriate?.

Lastly- if you are an adoptee or adopter I hope you do not take questioning a system personally . I do not question an adoptive family as less valid in anyway, I am asking about the UK process.

@namynom concurrent fostering sounds soul destroying for potential adopters if the baby is later returned, I’ll admit I couldn’t bond knowing the baby may go back. Hats off to anyone who could do it!

Re the ‘mistakes are made’, the cost of these are so so high. That’s why I’m voicing concern. I think both sides can give many many anecdotes about too soon/ too late, but I’m questioning the tracking of this group of children over time, the system of checks in the system and if it needs some reform? On what scale are mistakes made, and are these even formally recorded and analyses to inform the future. Or do they just disappear as unreportable info and a judgement that the adoption is final? It all seems very individualised, is there bough learning? Tracking? Analysis? If not funded and managed well enough, should it happen? When does a risk get unacceptable?

By family unit I include the child, an unsafe adoption has a massive impact on a child’s life. Adoption impacts a child in many ways, sometimes this is simply necessary, but it shouldn’t happen without a strong need

As a birth mother whose child was placed for adoption I can honestly say- yes if I had of been given the help when I was begging for it the outcome would most likely have been different but the reality was I couldn’t protect myself or my son and my son was best placed with a loving protective family and I was then able to access the support I needed to protect myself.

It has been the toughest most gut wrenching heart breaking journey of my life and the decision I made not to contest at the adoption order was that of a mother who recognised that she could not meet her child’s needs sufficiently at that point in time. It did not come from a lack of love or a lack of bond with my child. It was the hardest day of my life.

In the vast majority of adoptions letterbox Contact is offered- normally 1/2 per year. I do have this contact but it’s not an easy time for myself and there’s a lot wrong with the service- delays/social workers leaving and no communication all mean it can be impossible to find out if your letter has arrived and of course you are writing to what are pretty much strangers- as much as I respect and have a lot of love for my sons parents the reality is that I met them for one short meeting before our first letterbox so it was very hard to write. There was absolutely no support or guidance in writing the letter only that I am not allowed to call myself mum.

I would like to believe that the decisions are made with the child at the centre- it is not about punishment it’s about protection. Yes sometimes they do get it wrong. Yes sometimes more could have been done before a situation gets to the point that adoption is the only answer but the bottom line is what the child NEEDS right here and now as hard as that can be

My eldest of 2 was 8 when we adopted her and 6 when she went into care. She is now 20.
SS were involved from when she was 2 months old.
The family had numerous interventions from health visitors and SS.
Police were involved on numerous occasions.
Yet it took 6 years for her to be removed.

Honestly, if she had been removed younger she would be better 'adjusted' now as a young adult. her family had far too many chances.

I agree SS are underfunded.
And Yes, mistakes happen.

But leaving a child at risk can also lead to a child dying.

A child needing removal from parents has no good outcome, in as much as there is always some negative impact in the situation. It is just a point of finding the least bad solution.

Yes my children feel the loss of their birth family. But since placement with us they have had not only love but stability, support, education & opportunities to help them go forward into their adult lives.

Sometimes love is not enough.

(ps Most adoptions are not closed. Most have some form of at least indirect letterbox contact.)

So if you want to approach this, sort out the funding and the early intervention. Adoption occurs at the very end of a long, long set of events.

Children only get one childhood. They deserve a childhood free from neglect abuse and violence. They can't hang on for years in the hope their birth family will change.

What do you mean by mistake I wonder? A child removed inappropriately, a child left with a birth family for too long with no significant sign of change, an adoption breaking down, a child placed in permanent foster care? I guess it depends on whose viewpoint you see things from.

For my own part, social workers have a very fine line to walk in deciding whether a child should be removed permanently and in my experience parents have had repeated supports and processes to try and help them parent their child. They also have the right of legal representation and appeal at every stage of the process.

Yes it’s hard to split a family up, but it’s so much harder to know that children have experienced life changing impacts of abusive, neglectful parenting. The vast majority of children who are adopted have been exposed to alcohol and/or drugs in the womb, so right from conception they face adversity. Some babies are removed at birth - not because they are cute and adoptable but because they’re so impacted by in utero substance misuse they need to go through a withdrawal process.

I feel for birth parents who just can’t manage and who lose their children - much more should be done to support them in their loss - but no, I don’t think the adoption process needs to be made any harder than it already is. If you had any idea of the level of evidence needed to place a child in care, much less to free them for adoption I doubt you’d be asking the question.

Having said all of the above, I do also feel that if birth parents were actually given the support they needed to access services after a child is placed for adoption that could help break the cycle.

For me I got the help because I am tenacious and was determined not to have another child until I had dealt with all concerns and was able to be a decent mum. All too often no changes are made and birth parents have more children, resulting in the same cycle happening again.

OP, why not ask this question on the Mn adoption board, which has a group of thoughtful, articulate, highly-informed adoptive parents and some birth parents whose children have been adopted, too?

Sorry, I just realised my last post made it sound as if the birth parents were not equally thoughtful and well-informed -- they are!

Some responses are certainly strong for removal of children, but aren’t so clear on adoption. In the example of mothers who manage and move forward from issues, why must return be prevented? Certainly many keep siblings or future children

Certainly I’ve seen a pattern of those deemed ‘too old’ whilst at work, primary years zero contact, building into requests from children (many cases lashing out to gain it repeatedly). Most result in some contact being reestablished to some extent for at least one sibling, to some even returning. Children in the care system that are not adopted often do keep some contact. Often younger siblings are adopted, whilst older ones in care keep contact which then limits sibling contact also. It’s far far more complex than there simply being a lot of ‘scum’ out there. Yes, some are awful, but many are vulnerable at certain points in life. I think we aren’t managing the shades of grey cases often.

I haven’t posted in adoption for a few reasons

• space invasion, it seems rather insensitive to actively seek a board used by adopters and target them by bringing it to what may be the only bit of the site they use
• I presume it is likely more one sided on viewpoints
• I think it affects society as a whole and is worth discussing

Regarding ‘mistake’, I’m solely commenting on the child. Any child adopted unnecessarily and the associated impact. I understand the work adopters can do, and the impact on birth parents but I’m putting it aside for now. I think family structure and identity is important to children, and never a ‘just in case’ thing to disrupt on the basis of probability

Any child adopted unnecessarily

How do you define “unnecessarily”? Children need some sense of permanence and security, decisions about adoption give them that - a place in a family who can offer proper care and a sense of belonging. At some point children need to be able to move forward, to have ongoing contact with birth families keeps open a wound that might otherwise heal.

Sometimes birth parents do go on to keep subsequent siblings, but how long do you keep children in very adverse circumstances, how many tries to you give before deciding that for this child at this time it’s too much?

The reason you have older children who remain in foster care rather than being adopted is because they have reached a point where they can’t emotionally and psychologically settle in a family and wouldn’t cope with adoption. Think about that for a minutes, a child who is so emotionally impacted by their experiences that they can’t form healthy family attachments. These children remain in foster care - it is well researched that looked after children have much poorer outcomes than children who are adopted, if the older child could safely cope with adoption that would be the best option for them.

My two children are adopted, I don’t “work” with them, I parent them, love them and cherish them. They have blossomed knowing that they are my children forever and wouldn’t cope with contact with their birth family just now. They might when they are older, when they’ve healed some of the damage of their early experiences and have a level of maturity that might help them understand why their birth mum couldn’t keep them. If that happens I’ll support them as much as I can but it doesn’t mean their adoption was a mistake.

I think we aren’t managing the shades of grey cases often.

Do you have any evidence for this or is it your opinion based on anecdote? Because frankly they’re all shades of grey cases, you’re always making a decision now about what may happen in the future based on what has gone before. We don’t have infinite time to leave children in chaotic homes in the hope that mum might get it together enough to parent her children, because the longer the child is left, the deeper the scars. It’s easy in hindsight to think that a mistake has been made when you look at how the child has grown etc, what you don’t know is what might happen if the child is left.

Social workers are pretty much damned whatever we do, remove a child and we’re too hasty, place for adoption and we’re disregarding birth mum, leave the child and god forbid they die the social worker has been negligent. If you think there’s a better, safer way, I’d love to hear it.

I don’t think anyone who works in the system thinks it’s perfect. Most of us are well aware of its flaws, and try as much as we can to make small differences, wherever possible.

A few points

1. Contact levels post- adoption are usually dictated primarily by the adoptive parents. Often promises will be made to social workers that they will maintain limited contact, usually letter box, or a last face to face. I’d say the majority of the time adoptive parents agree to some form of contact, only to say they no longer wish to fulfil this after the adoptive order is made. SS and the courts are powerless to do anything about that. The adoptive parents have full parental rights.

1. It’s not so much that social services don’t offer the women and families the resources to help, but that the resources don’t exist. Sometimes, no matter how much something is needed, we are unable to make it happen. Sometime we can’t give mums the opportunities they need to keep their children in their care. Sometimes we set mothers up to fail. I promise you 90% of the time this isn’t negligence, but that the funding and resources just aren’t there. We aren’t miracle workers.

1. No adoption order is ever given with no or little evidence. These courts aren’t secret, they are closed. The standards which the judges who sit on the family circuit expect of professionals is incredibly high, and I firmly believe that the current flock tend to lean towards parents over children’s services the majority of the time. You just have to look at Munro and his opinions, to see evidence of that.

Also parents can and do make progress after the removal of a child. But at the end of the day current law and practice dictates that the child is priority, and their stability and permenancy needs to take precedence. Children shouldn’t be left to languish in care until parents can make adequate improvements. Adoption orders can’t be reversed, because that would be damaging to the child. Even in the rare cases where a child is removed on evidence which is later found to be inaccurate.

There is analysis and research on these matters. If you are that interested I would start with communitycare for general background, and then look at academic journals as well as resources such as research in practice.

Local authorities track everything when it comes to looked after children. In my current role I see adoption breakdowns when the child gets to their teens all the time. We are trying to get better, but this isn’t a quick process, and there is no fast overhaul which will change anything in a meaningful way.

It's almost impossible to lose custody of your children and parents complaining online about how it was over a dirty bedroom are liars, plain and simple.

My question is this: why do we disbelieve claims of child abuse when we believe claims of abuse against women so easily? If I went and asked a bunch of men convicted of DV whether they deserved their restraining orders or prison sentence, who is going to say YES IM A MONSTER. Not one. They are all going to make excuses and blame the system. Yet parents (i.e the neglecters and abusers) are given the benefit of the doubt over and over again.

If you look at the system and sympathise with "falsely accused parents" instead of abused children, don't feel superior to men who look at "falsely accused rapists" instead of rape victims. What's the difference?

I guess the difference is they’ve not been arrested for potentially raping anyone. No one has been Iocked up on the balance of probably raping in the future or being the son of an abuser who may carry on the cycle based on an assessment of their behaviour. They’d all have been tried in a criminal court. I’d equate the parents with files of evidence of wrongdoing, obviously an action with necessary reaction.

@Gomyownway I’m not questioning SW, I see the position they are often in. Many missed important meetings due to caseload clash and unmanageable workload, it’s a job I couldn’t do. The majority do the best than can in the framework and with the resource they have. The fact though we aren’t giving the resources isn’t good though, could stories be different with better funding? Not limitless, just the sensible bottom line with people not set up to fail.

People are defending adoption per se, I’m not outright dismissing it. Just saying do we need improvement in a certain area. Physical abuse removals are down, emotional neglect up. Shouldn’t we question and analyse a bit?

You're right. So get rid of convicted abusers.

Just people accused of abuse or subject to restraining orders. No criminal conviction, no jury of your peers, no beyond a reasonable doubt.

A man is accused of abuse. There's evidence (bruises) but no conviction. Why not take his side? Why not assume that it's a false accusation? Women make false accusations.

Women still get legal aid, are accepted into refuges, are allowed to modify custody based on "accusations". But the second children's rights are involved, then it's "where's the evidence"?

What's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

@jellycatspyjamas we’re both talking anecdotes aren’t we?

I can give stories of amazing success with older and younger children or groups, great stories. I can give stories if foster carers who changed lives, many staying into adulthood like birth children.

I can give stories of FC in it for money alone. I know of an adopter who lost children due to neglect. I’ve seen a disruption.

Lots of stories, but all strong opinions until we track it all and monitor outcomes

@zweifler1 bizarre train I don’t follow.

FakeUsername, Gomyownway is right that you aren't really asking anything profound because all you are saying is that you have a vague sense that something could be better.

well, duh

if you really care, get educated on the policy issues and find a way to get properly involved. going on mumsnet to perpetuate myths about social services isn't really doing anything new or important. There used to be a whole contingent of anti social services posters including an MP who encouraged parents to flee the country. Didn't that dad who was cleared, paraded around as an example of ss overreach and then eventually killed his child use to post here too?

I am an adoptor and a foster carer and in my 15 yrs experience the court process is extremely robust and requires v high levels of evidence to remove a child and release them for adoption.
I , and many other foster carers have seen too many cases where the kids were left in damaging families for far too long . Families are given lots of opportunities to change but sadly they are often unable to provide adequate parenting.
Really it is heart breaking all round.
And I have yet to meet a birth family whose children have been removed who has ever admitted to any wrongdoing whatsoever. It is always corrupt social workers, the system is against them etc etc .
And a final comment. Birth families can go to the media and spin the story their way but the other side of the argument can never be heard because the courts are confidential. If the full story could be heard it would paint a very different picture.

That a secret court can split families without evidence that would be taken to a criminal court

That doesn't happen. It's only "secret" in the sense that proceedings can't be reported for the general public to salivate over. It's a normal court hearing in all other respects, with parents being entitled to legal aid as of right so they have full representation. Local authorities are very reluctant to take children into care, not least because of the high costs involved. The courts are very, very conscious of the draconian nature of taking a child into care and freeing them for adoption, and require high standards of proof. And there is a full appeal system.

Of course the system isn't perfect, because people are fallible, but it has many safeguards built in. In countries in Europe which have lower adoption rates, it tends to be the case that the children in question instead spend their childhoods moving between children's homes and/or foster parents, with no sense of permanence and no-one they can look to as mother and/or father. That seems to me infinitely more damaging.