Woman awarded six figure payout for failed adoption

[inadequatepillow]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c623we048yzo

AIBU to feel a bit uncomfortable by the tone of this article?

I agree that the council should’ve been clearer about the child’s needs. But, if she’d birthed this child, he could’ve still had the same difficulties. It’s likely she’d have had no support with this if the child was hers biologically. The waits for paeds are shocking.

It says in the article he threw a heavy paperweight at her. How did he get hold of this? Why is she blaming the child?

I feel as though she’s wanted to adopt for selfish reasons and she was disappointed that she didn’t have a perfect, meek, easy kid.

When you give birth to a child, it’s luck of the draw. My son has SEND similar to the child in the article. On days when it gets a bit much for me am I supposed to just give him up for adoption? No, because I am his mother and my job is to raise him regardless of how hard it is.

I don’t think when adopting you should be able to be so picky. The child needed a home, she wanted a kid. It’s not like going to the RSPCA and ignoring all the three legged cats…

A relative of mine was offered 2 sisters (18 months and 3) to adopt very quickly after the vetting process, which had been surprisingly rapid. I am a former social worker and there were alarm bells ringing for me. It felt as though there were children that the LA was struggling to place and they wanted to make this happen as speedily as possible.

There were 3 siblings offered, but my relative and spouse turned down one of these as they recognised that as first time parents they simply would not be able to manage.

All the chidlren had been damaged by maternal drug-taking in utero and by parental abuse after birth with the result that the older one was emotionally traumatised and the younger brain-damaged. Only the loosest of information was provided, and no post adoption support was given - none at all.

These new parents should have had clear and detailed information about the children's problems and should have received intensive support to make the placement work (and to deal with their sense of guilt at having had to refuse one sibling).

These two girls have been given the best childhood possible under the circumstances, but at a cost to the parents that is incalculable. I will not outline all the problems as it could be outing.

The situation as outlined in the OP is not the least unusual in terms of the lack of information and support. What is unusual is the woman's decision to pursue compensation, which I guess does feel a bit grabby. BUT - the publicity surrounding it has highlighted the absence of support to new adopters and this is a good thing. It might of course deter some potential adopters, but hopefully those allocating funds will be forced to listen and learn.

Incidentally, the absence of support for any parents with children with special needs is also abysmal and this needs addressing too.

I am not ignorant of the pressures on social workers involved in adoption and I am sure that their fervent wish is to do the best job possible; but their hands are tied by funding and staffing issues, and the general inadequacy of support for children with special needs.

I think this may be one of the silliest things I’ve read on Mn, which is saying something.

I know someone who adopted via a Catholic adoption society. They’d said they wanted to adopt one child but were pressured into accepting a sibling group of three. The eldest ended up going back into care as they were already so badly damaged they were a danger to the other two. Very sad situation all round. Though I believe the other two turned out well.

I think you haven't a clue what you are talking about, OP.

Adoption agencies should explain in detail a child's history and train adoptive parents how to handle severely traumatised or neglected children.

If the child had been hers biologically she would have come to know them and their moods, however challenging, gradually, over time.

As to 'how did he get hold of the paperweight?' - if it hadn't been that, it would have been something else. A child whose formative years were spent in a violent home, or whose neurology has been damaged by FAS or drug addiction via the birth mother could use anything as a weapon and could be randomly triggered by something that to the parent seems utterly safe and banal. I work with someone who had a very traumatised childhood and they have explained to me that the most ordinary everyday objects and events cause them severe and sometime psychotic responses.

I know several adoptive parents who have been through hell for offering to give a home to abused and neglected children, one of whom I think totally deserves a payout, though she'd never ask for it. She was devoted and loving and almost murdered more than once. Another was falsely accused of sexual abuse and suffered months of police scrutiny. That poor child probably had been abused in the past but not by the adoptive parent.

The needs of traumatised children are extremely complex and routinely hidden from adoptive parents in order to create placements. After care is almost non existent.

I hope this settlement acts as a warning to adoption agencies not to smokescreen the real needs and issues that certain children have.

Honestly, people are so clueless. I know so many people who told my friend all her children needed was 'love'. My friend loved and doted on those children - it was apparent from the way she talked about them, behaved with them, and what she endured. But the oldest one still used her as a punching bag until she nearly died. I don't respect any comments from people who are incapable of imagining what it must be like to parent such a child.

Where does it say what she did with the money?

Most have to do it they have no choice we don't know wether this was a relinquished child or not
I'm basing this on my experience of having a disabled child and knowing lots of other families with disabled children
There is a thing called shared care ,but it's not actually shared care ,as you might imagine a child maybe offered a few hours respite a,weeks and its called shared care
We actually have a reasonable amount of respite now we get two over nights a month ,every other Saturday in a special needs club ( five hours) and one day a,week every school holiday in the same club for six hours ,but it's taken years for this and not exactly equal care

I actually think the woman in the story was very upfront with what she was capable of managing. As an adoptive couple we were presented with the same question about level of need we felt able to support and we also that severe needs were not something we felt able at that point to provide significant support for. Yes we may have had a child with need naturally as it were, however adopting a child is differnt. Their is the need but there is also the trauma that separation, fostering, abandonment etc may have caused and the connection and pressure of social workers, assessment, birth family contact and unlike many natural births this all happens at once and like in the woman's situation with a child who I'd already more mobile than a newborn.

What I am furious and disgusted about is how a council and soical worker team have failed this child so significantly. There is a family out there who have the skills and experience for this poor child but they are ignoring finding the best match for him. Makes me worry about their placement procedure in general.

My friend had a very similar story, had first child naturally then could not convince again and adopted a 2yo when the older one was 8. The new ds had known issues that were not disclosed, incredibly violent including torturing the family pet. The elder ds moved in with grandparents and they kept trying but failed after 18 months. Family are horribly scarred by this and that poor child was failed.

Well done to this woman for taking a broken system into account.

I have several friends who foster, some have taken on very long placements. The lack of information and support that they’ve had has been shocking. Numerous times it’s been incredibly traumatic, no details about long term conditions and causes of conditions, fights to get support. Only finding out the truth of the conditions when the child gets adopted by a new family. Children taken away suddenly with reason given.

The system is frequently failing these poor kids and the wonderful adults who are trying to help them.

It's definitely up there.

i think most of those adopted will have health difficulties owing to the nature of their requiring adoption.
it is surprising she has received a payout
i think people need to go into adoption with their eyes fully open but i guess this was 10 years ago and hope things are better now

I totally feel for her- she was misled and it looks like the council has basically admitted it

I do feel for the poor kid though and hope it worked out for him somehow

The fault clearly lies with the council here, but there are no winners in these cases 😕

There arent even records kept of failed adoptions.

It's high and no one e wants to acknowledge this.

I think we are talking at cross purposes. I also have a disabled child and have lots of friends with disabled children due to the special school he attends and have experience of a failed adoption within my extended family.

Saying most do it as they have no choice is part of what I mean. They are found not to be able to care for thier child. All birth parents are not just getting on with it.

I really don't think it is controversial to suggest the LA has a duty to ensure the next parent is able to care for this child and they didnt.

It is damages. They caused her harm.

The misinformation and perhaps willful incompetence led to her being damaged. Social services did not fulfil their duty of care. She will deserve every penny.

And yes obviously it is devastating for the child but that is not the fault of the adopted but is related to her being unable to make an informed choice.

There is a pressure on Social workers to hit adoption targets. Sometimes ours came across as used car salesmen.

i am a foster carer , shared lives carer and adoptor. My youngest child was adopted from foster care and our 18 yr old has been with us all his life but not adopted as the local authority refused to allow it saying we would get more support for him post 18 if he remained in foster care. Both of them have extremely complex needs ( medical, physical and cognitively )
Well I have to tell you that we got zero extra support when he was young and no respite for many years until we fought tooth and nail for it. And the post 18 transition has been nothing short of a disaster. So foster care does not guarantee support for the family either.
There is v little support out there for families coping with complex needs kids ( adopted or otherwise ) overall. It is a disgrace really .

I feel so sorry for both her and the child. What an awful situation to be put in.

I confess though I'm confused about the payout. Payout for what? I assume she sued the council - is this like being award damages?

You’re being unfair. She did her best, but was essentially lied to. She made it clear she wouldn’t be able to cope alone with a child with severe needs, but they ignored her. The fact she got a payout shows how badly it was handled.

I would have thought the same until my friend adopted. She made it clear that she could not cope with a child with additional needs and social services lied through their teeth. She loves her son but the hell she has to go through every day. I won’t go into it but it is awful. I feel sorry for her and the child.

See my post earlier in the thread (07:06) that explains the principle of compensatory damages.

I really feel for her, and the child of course.

Fair play to her for holding the council to account, there must have been times over the past decade she was tempted to stop.

Sadly, financial judgements seem to be much bigger deterrents than poor outcomes for children. She hopefully has saved some other families from going through the same trauma in future.

and how do you have any idea of what she intends to do with the money?

I think the woman was misled as to the child's needs and that she was brave and right to admit that she couldn't cope. However, I disagree with the monetary compensation. If she really brought the court case to highlight the failings of SS and the lack of support for adoptive parents then she should keep only enough of the money to cover the cost of bringing the case. The rest should be donated to charity possibly one specialising in helping adoptees and their families?