To think adoption is often more about adults’ desires than children’s needs?

[MyNoisyGreyPombear]

It’s always framed as noble. But AIBU to think adoption sometimes fulfils adults’ wishes first, while the child’s trauma and identity issues get overlooked?

Keeping it vague but a couple I know of are in process of adopting a child. Child has been in foster care since birth & is under 2. What would you suggest for that child if not adoption?

I really feel like this shouldn't need to be pointed out or explained, but apparently it does.

When an adopter is telling their story, that is exactly what they're doing. They're telling their story from their perspective. Their child's story is not theirs to tell. It is absolutely right that they do not start telling the world about their child's trauma.

The process to adopt is rigorous and in depth. Nobody going through it could realistically be under any illusions of it being all sunshine and rainbows and they will absolutely be aware of the trauma involved, ongoing issues and will be trained in how to maintain the child's identity.

What do you suggest would be the most viable alternative to adoption, given you've apparently decided it is a vanity event to make adults feel good?

Every single person who has found themselves in this world is there because of an adult's desire - either an adult's desire for a child or an adult's desire for sex that resulted in a pregnancy.

Plus, most adoptive parents (in my experience anyway) choose not to share their children's stories as they belong to the children. So they tell their own story instead if they wish.

As an adoptive mother to twins, I wouldn't dream of sharing their adoption stories and the loss they have known. That would be a real betrayal. And it's noone else's business. I don't share much of my own journey either unless someone specifically asks or is interested in adoption themselves. You may know adoptive parents who present themselves as marvellous to all and sundry but I don't know any - we are all just getting on with life as families do. Today, I am retrieving water bottles from around the garden and do not feel in the least bit "noble."

From abroad - yes possibly. From UK - probably not. The children would be in a children’s home or an abusive home and that has to be the last thing anyone wants.

I think you would only think that if you had no real life experience of adoption.

I'm not sure your post is correct in terms of UK domestic adoption- in that case, the trauma and loss has happened regardless and having a stable home with adoptive parents is probably the best possible outcome. We are generally talking about children who already have no contact with their biological parents for various reasons - in some cases people do adopt biological siblings together or at different times, or maintain that family connection in other ways, so children are able to maintain that biological relationship- which I do think is beneficial. However sometimes this can't happen or isn't in the best interests of the children either.

I would say in many cases with international adoption or the way adoption can work in countries such as the US, you may be right- young women are often forced into a situation where they give up their child solely due to economic and social pressures- when they would be capable of being an adequate parents with the right support. But it helps provide a steady stream of babies who appear to have limited trauma for those who want them. In reality, you are right- adoption is always a trauma, especially if the connection is severed totally with the birth family and culture. I do think in the US, more people now practice open adoption with some contact with the birth parents, and that can also be a good outcome for everyone (or at least the least worst outcome).

In general, whilst I would always say we should support families to stay together, it is a fact that some children cannot stay within their birth family, and the care system in the UK also does not provide good outcomes for these children- plus adoption usually provides lifelong support- whereas the care system often starts to withdraw at 16 and by 18 these children are often totally on their own with very limited support from anyone.

@Lavenderandbrown

Are you in the US? There is no way that ‘rehoming’ is permitted to happen here in the UK. In England and Wales (I’m not sure about Scotland), if an adoption disrupts or breaks down, children are generally re accommodated by local authorities under section 20 of the Children’s Act of 1989.

Why do you think adoption might not be the best solution for children who can't be with their natural parents for whatever reason?

I’m very disturbed by the recent social media trend of some adoptive parents putting their children on social
media and telling their stories. Adoptees should decide how, when and to whom they disclose that information. In those cases, I definitely think they are putting their needs above those of their children and often exploiting their often traumatic histories for clout.

I dont have any adopted children personally, but I think that someone wanting to be a parent at all is about their own wants and needs.

Of course their is an imbalance, adults need to decide they want to adopt before a child can even get a look in.

I've wondered that about the little boy who had his legs amputated because of abuse then raised money during COVID. He was young and I wondered how he'd feel about everyone knowing about it when he's older. It always felt a bit uncomfortable to me.

I've had a job assessing prospective adopters. Yes, it is to meet a need of theirs. If they said it wasn't I'd be very concerned about the reasons and their ability to commit to the child and treat them as family. It's completely unrealistic to think someone would commit to an unrelated child with trauma for the rest of their life if they didn't actually want a child for themselves . They do get a lot of training about the reality of bringing up an adopted child and get assessed on their skills, resilience and values to ensure they can prioritise a child.

@Ratafia

Kindly and respectfully, and I hate to be an arse, but ‘natural’ parents is not a term that we adopters use or enjoy. It smacks of othering and we are already othered enough, believe me. We are not unnatural. We have simply stepped up to parent the most vulnerable of society’s children, the children who are deemed to be at such risk from their ‘natural’ parents that they will never return home, despite the fact that the legal framework in the UK is designed to ensure that everything can be done to keep babies and children with their birth parents and families of origin.

of course it is told from the parents journey. Do you think that a child's journey should be told? I do not. Until that child is of an age that THEY want to tell their journey. I have friends in Canada that adopted a 8 year old girl and her 5 year old brother, from the worst of conditions. It took a long time from the first home visits, the first sleepovers, the first "trial" period as fostering. The whole way along, they knew that even though they needed to give these kids their ALL, it could be whipped away from them at the last minute. It was successful for them in the end, and they have two great kids (now young adults) I do not believe in bashing these amazing people that take on, and love kids that would be in the system otherwise.

I'm a primary school teacher and I've taught adopted children, I also know a couple of people who have adopted and I have a friend who was adopted as a baby. It is not an easy task. In Northern Ireland it is a long and rigorous process. Children coming from trauma can have emotional and behavioural challenges. Wetting the bed, emotional breakdowns, anger, anxiety, issues in school to name a few. It is amazing to open your home to a child who desperately needs a loving home. I think it is an amazing thing to do.

Surely adoption works from both ends though? Like if a person or couple decide they want to adopt, they don't just get to look around the local area and take the child they fancy! The adoption won't even be considered, unless the decision to remove the child from their family has been made, and often the actual removing them has happen and they are already fostered, in a children's home, or something. Yes the adults' wish to adopt is fulfilled, but the child will experience trauma anyway if they have lost both parents or need removing from their home.

Those within the CEP community would disagree that it is goady way of putting it. Sadly it is also realistic way of putting it.

I have met one individual for whom I think adopting was mainly about some kind of psychological issues of her own. She seemed to kind of collect children who she adopted from abroad, and made the whole thing a core part of her identity. Adoptive mum, autism mum, mum of a big family, mum involved with orphanages abroad....

Right up until she had a breakdown and left the family.

I wasn't shocked tbh, but a lot of people were.

Becoming a parent is always about the adult's desires, isn't it? No one has a child selflessly.

Adoption is the most demanding route to becoming a parent, and adoptive parents are the most tested and have put the most thought into it of all parents.

There definitely isn't enough post adoption support for traumatised children though.

yes. And their story to tell, if they ever choose to.

Sorry to burst your bubble that is not entirely accurate. Some children are sadly adopted by predators and further abused.

As long as they do a good job of parenting, does it matter?

The child needs love and stability, the parent wants to give love and stability. It seems to be two sides of the same coin.

There is valuable and insightful research being conducted in these areas by those with actual lived expertise. However, authentic and quality research takes time to develop and be processed.