To wonder why adoptive parents get paid?

[Member786488]

I’ll try and post a link to the story…

Possibly being dim… not unheard of.
I understand the fostering payments obviously but surely finance is something you consider if you’re going to have a child, so why is that different if you adopt.

other than some initial costs, why do you receive regular ‘adoption’ payments until the child is 18?

You put the bat signal out OP!

Lovely to see so many posters (adoptees, adopters or not) setting things right. One thing we do often get as adopters is a thick skin, a lack of tolerance for nonsense and misinformation and resilience.

One thing I’d like to add though is that not all adoption families are experiencing challenging situations, all the time. My kids were considered hard to place and we do have some trauma/attachment related behaviour - but right now, they are doing amazingly. I can’t believe how resilient, how strong and how bloody fantastic they are. They are my two favourite people in the world. We are not at the teenage years yet though - we could have many bumps ahead, but we’ll cross those bridges when we get to them.

I haven't read the article but I know of a lady who was fostering 3 siblings who were waiting to be adopted. It was acknowledged that the oldest sibling was very unlikely to be adopted due to their age. They initially offered foster mum the option of adopting all three but there was no way she could afford to go from the income from fostering 3 kinds to zero so she sadly had to decline. She was devastated that it had come down to a financial decision and the siblings were separated with the oldest remaining in long term foster care.

I'm not sure what the answer should be but a financial incentive would ensured a better outcome in this instance imo.

just depends on the child, really, and the allowances. Overall we made a huge loss fostering , but on some individual children we probably made a profit, if they happened to eat very little, and not destroy things, or want expensive extracurricular activites, etc.

It explains why OP - it’s for high needs kids who wouldn’t otherwise get adopted.

Not everyone would get it.

I got an adoption allowance from day 1 - I didn't even know it existed. The reason was because the local authority panel who stamped my adoption realised before I did that I would never be able to return to my previous job because my child was so high needs.
I wish they had the nerve to tell me - at that point you've not even met the child, it's all a paper exercise....but at least the money they granted me every money till they turn 21 means they won't become homeless or hungry anytime soon....unless of course they stop it with no notice! (My LA don't, but many do!)

Locally it was for adopting children with severe trauma and disabilities. I remember when we were considering adoption, we were offered nearly 500/mth to adopt a boy who had been sexually abused and who had been taken out of primary school three times due to sexually inappropriate behaviour to adults. I wouldn’t have been able to do it even with the money

Honestly I think the threshold for SS involvement / taking kids away from birth needs to be lowered. If they were and healthier untraumatised children were put up for adoption then there would be no need for the payment.

absolute clown.

The vast majority don't. It's means tested and hard to get. I know dozens of other adopters and only know of a handful of cases where kids have severe needs.

Honestly I think the threshold for SS involvement / taking kids away from birth needs to be lowered. If they were and healthier untraumatised children were put up for adoption then there would be no need for the payment.

No child comes to adoption untraumatised, the very act of removing a child from their family of origin at any age is deeply traumatic and should be avoided unless there’s no other option. Yes some children experience significant trauma before adoption, many are impacted by substance misuse which contributes significantly to the complex needs they have - the harm is done pre-birth.

That doesn’t mean all adopted children are difficult to parent, my DD has very complex needs but she’s easy to parent, my DS equally so. We have a very normal family life, day to day we look like any other family. The adoption allowance reflects the need for me to be available for health appointments, therapy sessions, liaising with school etc which means working full time is impossible. Life is generally good, if a bit intense at times.

They don’t as a rule. I don’t. But children with more complex needs or more difficult to place (large sibling groups, for example) may be entitled to some form of financial support.

I completely agree

Not the school admissions. Admissions Law stipulates that after children with the school named in their EHCP, those who are adopted from care, whether in the UK or from overseas, have to be prioritised (which the proviso that a faith school can prioritise those of the faith above those not) in exactly the same way that a current LAC is.

as a tax payer I don’t have issue with parents of adopted children getting extra income they do have extra needs.

Not in Scotland. No priority for adopted kids in Scotland and no adoption support fund either.

And really..adopted parents getting paid...🤣🤣🤣!
As others have said, many are worse off.

The school admissions system in Scotland is different though, you’re pretty much guaranteed a place in your catchment school and can make a placing request if you think another school will better meet your child’s needs.

And no adoption support fund, but I’ve found it much easier to negotiate with schools and services for support - not saying it’s easy but not having the whole ECHP process means support can be more nimble. I’ve had quite a bit of post adoption support through my local authority and there are other services I can access in future if and when needed.

Theres much better support for adopted children in higher education too - I’m not a fan of Sturgeon but she had a keen focus on children with care experience, which has followed through in some practice areas.

Agree adoptive parents don't go in for financial reasons. They are our children. Certainly teen and 20s for us were and continue to be most challenging. Whatever we will always love our children although their behaviours can seem hurtful. Unfortunately early trauma needs more than love and money. Generally my experience adoptive parents do their absolute best for their children

Thank you.

The original post was as hastily sent out after being skimmed this morning. I stupidly hadn’t considered the reality of the children that often come up for adoption and their corresponding needs.
Parents who take these children on and give them a loving home are more selfless than I, and thank you for contributing to the kind of society I want to live in.

I’m not goady, I was thoughtless and I’m sorry, I should have thought it through.

OP, you have no idea. We have two adopted children in our family, and the parents get nothing, even though both of the children have additional needs. One of them was born addicted to heroin, the other one has severe issues because the child came from an abusive background.

Just as an example, the money could not only have gone towards therapy, but it might have helped pay to repair the damage each time child 2 kicked lumps out of the house in an uncontrollable rage. Adopting chidren from abusive backgrounds means taking on a massive and very different commitment from birth children.

Yes I think it heavily depends on your local authority. Ours is not known for its adoption support.

Thank you OP for taking time to reflect.