Post adoption contact has ruined the chance of adoption for so many children

[Popcornhero]

I am a paediatrician, Mum of three children (who arrived by adoption) and have several foster carer and social worker friends. I keep seeing children no longer getting adopted now there is an expectation for face to face contact with birth families.

I have seen this through work recently, and today was chatting to a foster carer friend who was saying how many children in their fostering network are no longer being adopted. Shehas a 14 month old in her care, who she's been approached to keep as a long term foster as he's been up for adoption for a year with no one to take him.

The rules now around face to face contact with birth families have meant adoption rates have plummeted. I'm so angry about it. Children deserve a fresh start with their new family & they aren't getting it because needs of birth parents are being prioritised.

Some research suggests adoptees would have liked more contact, but there is a bias in the literature. It's those most affected by the adoption that are coming forward not those who grew up and moved on and adoption is only one part of their story.

I know we wouldn't have adopted it we had had to maintain face to face contact with the birth family. They are our children and they have a lovely protected life. We changed our children's names to give them a better chance in life ( they had for example names like Thor, Loki and Renesmee and are now, Theo, Luca and Esme) **just an example. We never send photos so they can be captured in birthday parties and their identity remains safe. They know their story, they know why we are their parents. We write to the birth family yearly. It would be awful for them to feel split between two worlds.

Surely they need to review the impact this has had,before more children lose the chance at having a family?

As an adoptee, I agree with you.

This could certainly be a reason, alongside increased awareness of the lack of post-adoption support, and the extent/implications of adoption breakdown.

Do the statistics in fact bear this out?

The adopters I know stopped direct contact with family members if it wasn’t working for the children. I mean, it’s not enforceable anyway, after the adoption order has been granted, as far as I’m aware.

I am also an adoptee and I also agree. This policy that puts the wishes of adults before the wellbeing of children.

I think it should be decided case by case. It could be very beneficial for some children to maintain contact with their birth family.

It’s a difficult one. Presumably the theory is that meeting birth family could be helpful for the DC, with contact limited.

There are other factors that could be affecting the number of people seeking to adopt DC, such as poor public services, high proportion of DC with significant additional needs, and that social media means that many will find or be found by birth family in their early teens.

See, to me, these scenarios are what fostering is for. Children who are adopted have parents and it is not the ones they are born to, but the ones they live with. That feeling of belonging and being part of a stable family is essential and very difficult for them to achieve if they are confused by a previous set of parents hanging around.

Adopter here. Contact is not enforceable so i'm.not sure this as a reason for the decrease adoption is accurate.
More likely its the severe lack of support given to both plac and the adopters.

This is it to me. If they can't be totally separated from the birth family then they should be in long term foster care.

Adopted children have a family and need normality and security.

Imagine living with your parents and having to nip off to the zoo to catch up with your "other mum" who didn't keep you safe?

Also you can't stop small children naming their school, surname,village etc. so their safety is then at risk.

Not to mention issues around them not turning up, or realising the parents are affluent and going after money.

Agree OP.

It cannot be good for children to have contact with the parents who didn’t want them which is effectively how children will see things, especially if the parents go on to have further children that live with them.

As a massive sweeping statement that is in the Vinicius of being true, parents of children given up for adoption are not the best parents on the planet. Chaotic, abusive, absent, unreliable people are not good for children.

But surely this change came about because so many adopted children were seeking out birth families on the intranet, often with disasterous results.

we offered face to face contact once a year for our adopted child. We already knew the family as he was our foster child. In 10 yrs they have turned up twice and haven't seen.him for 6 yrs now.
Many birth families are not able to.cope with it either which could do even more damage to the children caught in the middle.

No, it was more to do with the adults.

I think you're very biased on this. The focus should be for children to have some form of contact with their family. Adoption is traumatic, whether it's from birth or at a later age.
If people don't want to adopt because they may have to keep some form of contact then maybe they aren't doing it for the right reasons. No one is entitled to a child and a child's trauma is not a solution to infertility.

Surely if a family is stable enough to be in a childs life lingterm then they should be supported to raise those children with short term fostercare in place whilst that is achieved?

If they are unable to provide a stable environment for children fullstop, to the point of adoption then why do they have rights to visitation??

No it's not.

Ours are currently primary and preschool age. When they are old enough, I will support them making contact if they want to, but my stipulation is that it has to be what they want, when they want it and when they are in the best position to process their thoughts about it.

Once adopted the birth parents are not their family. They give up their right to that.

Interesting post

I have no foot in either camp. But if I was adopting someone, I think I would feel put off by the expectation that I should share the mothering role with their bio mum

It feels wrong to feel that way though 😕. Who am I to deny a vulnerable woman the chance to rehabilitate herself and have contact with her kids

Imo though, thats why fostering is there. Fostering is temporary, adoption is permenant, as shit as that feels to think about a vulnerable woman giving up her baby

I am against surrogacy for money (carrying your sisters baby for her is different imo), so think that full on adoption needs to be made a clear option for gay male couples/couples who are affected by infertility

I agree with you OP, myself & DH looked into adoption after infertility & this was the main thing that made us reconsider.

Agree 100% OP. I was adopted as an infant so it was about as straightforward as could be, relatively. I traced my biological mother an adult. She is a lovely woman and struggled with what happened but didnt regret it. I can't see how it would have benefited her, me or my parents to have been in contact. In fact the idea is awful to me. I suspect it's different for an older child though.

I think adoption can be a very positive thing and of benefit to society so should be encouraged through supports for all involved.

It's more complicated than that. In reality, many birth parents don't want F2F contact after adoption.

Some adoptive parents (including) a relative of mine want to pretend the birth parents don't exist. I find it really uncomfortable being around this child who is 9 and doesn't know they are adopted.

I feel like it will all blow up one day and said child will think everyone (Uncles, Aunts, Grandparents, and cousins) have lied to them over the years.

All because the mother is insecure about not being the birth parent, but essentially lies to the child.

I thought it was more of letter box contact and not F2F.

Nail on head.

Of course I'm biased. I'm a mama bear who wants to protect her cubs. BUT I also have professional knowledge in this field and a lot of people around me with personal and professional experience. I cannot accept that people that for whatever reason (& they are complex reasons) couldn't keep their child safe and happy, then a child should not be exposed to them.

It also teaches the child that adoption isn't their family in the truest sense. They are people caring for them and taking them to visit the biological family.

They will always be that child's biological parents. Whether they were capable of raising them or not, that child should be the focus. Of course I'm not advocating for sleepovers or anything to that extent but allowing a child to have a letter or know who their brothers and sisters are is important.
I have seen first hand how important it is for children to have contact with biological family even when they aren't the best people to raise them.
Adopted parents are their parents but they still have a connection and trauma that needs to be allowed to be dealt with and not blocked out to avoid disturbing adoptive parents ego.

Children deserve to know their families .

They do. The adopted family is their family.