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?

Not all drug addicts are bad people.
This is true. Far from it. They can be wonderful, creative, highly sensitive people living a tragedy.

Changing of names was a big no no when we adopted. My son has a name that would not have been one we would have chosen in a million years but it was his name and part of his history so we kept it. It has not held him back in life.

It's still frowned upon. I gave my reasons but I also started wondering why I defended it. Actually other parents get to choose their children's names and I'm not sure it is more important to retain a name given by someone who knew them for days, when their parents will have them forever. Like I say, we did it for protective reasons but I'm not sure I need to feel guilty for naming my children.

There’s a very big difference also from changing their name when adopted as new babies and changing the name of an adopted child maybe 2 or over. The latter is obviously going to create more confusion and trauma and remove their own established identity and understanding of themselves.

However I will say it again, a lot of the criticism comes from adoptees themselves who feel they are having their history taken away from them. I feel their voices should be listened to on this matter.

Adoptees should of course be listened to.

We have an adopted DGC who we love dearly. DGC came into the family as a baby, their name was adapted with a nod to their birth name, and retention of a middle name. Letter box contact has continued as agreed even though it’s not regularly responded to by BM. BF has never been involved.

DGC has met a sibling, previously adopted, and knows of another older one. SS has not kept adoptive family updated about younger siblings, but there is more than one. I don’t believe adoptive families get enough support, and I agree with others that they should get automatic access to CAMHS if necessary.

I have NC for this as this thread is on the main board and not the adoption board - so I hope you will forgive me. I am an adoptive mum and my daughter is now an adult (we brought her home when she was 1 year old). With regards to direct contact (face to face) I would like to add the following to this discussion -

1. There are reasons why birth parents lead chaotic and dysfunctional lives and are unable to put their children's needs above their own. This is due to factors such as them also having mental health/undiagnosed ND conditions. Such conditions as mentioned up thread have a very high genetic component - eg ASD, ADHD, PDA and learning difficulties.
2. Consequently birth parents don't tend to be the most reliable, consistent, reasonable or safe people to deal with.
3. Adopted children tend to be VERY emotionally immature for their age and consequently very vulnerable. They develop into very vulnerable young people/adults. This is because they have suffered trauma in the birth family (eg neglect, physical abuse, sexual abuse), they also suffer from attachment issues and also have genetic ND/SEN conditions. All of this impacts on their behaviour and can make them very challenging to parent and thus they require a different way of parenting (therapeutic parenting). This is completely different to parenting securely attached NT birth children (I have birth children as well).
4. Contact is always considered by social workers and I believe should be on a case by case basis. My daughter was removed at birth for very good reasons and placed straight into foster care. Despite never living with birth mother I was asked to agree to yearly letter box contact with her- which I agreed to do. Although letter box is supposed to be between the adults - social workers were very much on the side of birth parents and do suggest that the child participates in contact too - sending cards, drawing pictures. Direct contact was not suggested and had it been I would have said "no".
5. The adoption triangle is based on the belief that birth family are reliable, consistent, mature, reasonable people - unfortunately in most cases they aren't and if they were their children wouldn't have been removed in the first place. They often don't participate in letter box - don't bother replying - and if the child is taking part in letter box then this results in reinforcing feelings of abandonment, rejection, hurt and unbelievable pain for the adopted child. Considering the vulnerability of the adopted child expecting them to be able to deal with this is asking too much. Expecting the adoptive parents to consistently see their child being hurt so much yet continue with contact is also asking too much.
6. Direct contact - I can see the benefit of this in certain situations eg if the child is older and has spent a large part of their life in the birth home - knowing that their birth parent is safe can be very reassuring for them. However, direct contact can be very unsettling for the child and can lead to very challenging behaviour at home for days/weeks after the meeting. This is because behaviour is communication and the child -who is emotionally immature for their age - is unable to verbally voice their feelings. If the birth parent doesn't turn up at all then this can lead to hurt/rejection in the adopted child.
7. There is a complete lack of support for adoptive parents facing these challenges with regards to contact. Most adoptive parents take their responsibilities on this issue really seriously because social workers drum into them that they have to do contact - when in fact adoptive parents don't. I remember years ago on the adoption UK forum the number of adoptive parents in this exact situation wondering if it would be ok to stop contact.
8. My daughter's birth mum only sent one letter box letter. I had a social worker phone me and tell me that birth mum had been in touch and wanted to know how her daughter was doing and so I had to write a letter. I refused saying that letter box was for the befit of the child and not for the birth mum and if she wanted to know how "my daughter" was doing then she would have to write first. TWO years later I received a letter from her and I duly replied.
9. My daughter traced her birth mum via social media a just over a year ago - she has sorted her life out and I am happy to support it. However it's not been easy to navigate and my daughter's placing authority has a two year waiting list for help with this.

I could go on and on but won't. But adoptive parents love their adopted children deeply and would give their lives for them. They have to be trusted to do the best for their children without judgement just as birth parents who haven't had their children removed (the vast majority of parents) are allowed to do. Xx

One person upthread said it felt like having something she'd had from her birth parents being taken away from her. But obviously this varies hugely depending on situation, safety concerns etc

I do think adoption is inherently different on the name question though as other people are by default involved due to biological relationship. Obviously they may be immoral, cruel etc, and this shouldn't mean the child should feel obligated to feel a connection or ever have contact. But the fact of the child having originally lived with others, and having a biological connection does mean the question of who should name is inherently more complex than with a non-adopted child.

Great, very informative post.

I wonder if maybe there should be a strict rule that if birth parents don't send their letter/turn up, after three times missing, contact is stopped. That way, if they really wanted it they would need to pull themselves together, and the child wouldn't be traumatised by constantly wondering if they will turn up/write or not

A biological parent can’t be simply described as someone who “knew them for days” as if they were a random babysitter. They are their parent, their DNA, a mother who carried a child for 9 months.

i can’t agree with “everyone else gets to name their child”, an adopted child has adoptive parents and biological parents. A name is part of their background, their identity.

I have less of an issue with changing a name because of a fear of ridicule than changing it because of a feeling of entitlement to “my child”.

Great replies on here, especially from adoptive parents.

Another thing i that i just thought about is how much my adopted late DB was so difficult to parent during his teenage years. I agree that there was most certainly a really strong element of inherited depressive tendencies, alongside anger and frustration about being gay.

I know that my parents tried so hard to be the best that they possibly could to give him a wonderful life and childhood, but unfortunately his own struggles and life choices certainly contributed to his poor health and cancer.

We were very much two quite vulnerable children and wete so lucky to be brought up in such a stable, loving home.

The child doesn’t know. The letters are between the adoptive parent and the birth parents/s, passed on, not always very reliably or punctually, via an intermediary at the adoption agency. The child isn’t involved and is certainly not sitting about waiting for a reply. Neither is the adoptive parent.

In reality I know very few adoptive parents who got regular replies. In some cases the letters just piled up at the adoption agency, unread, but the parents felt it was important to keep going on the offchance the birth parents felt able to face them. Some stopped after a while at the request of their children when older.

I think, though, that any of my friends who adopted their children and who also met one or both of the birth parents during the process (as does happen sometimes) were sharply aware of how chaotic their lives often were and how poor theur MH sometimes was, and of how overwhelming they would find getting letters about a child taken from their care, far less managing to write a reply to the person who is now their child’s parent. I admire my friends for how they so often manage to retain compassion for birth parents who abused or neglected their beloved children, whom they advocate and fight for like tigers, often with minimal support.

@Nomorecakefornow Great post, especially point 3 on emotional immaturity.

You make a lot of good points.

But it’s not about being trusted to make decisions the same way birth parents are allowed to. It’s more complex than that. Adoptive children also have birth parents. The two situations are not the same.

I was struck by your response to the birth mother asking for a letter and your language “my daughter” when she asked after her daughter. She is her daughter. She is also your daughter.

A woman who you acknowledge in your first point may be vulnerable herself reached out to you to ask about her bio daughter and you forced her to be the one to make contact.

If adoptive parents are discussing en masse how to end contact with biological parents is it always for the right reasons?

If adoptive parents are discussing en masse how to end contact with biological parents is it always for the right reasons?

How is that what you took from that brilliant post? PP was saying there are loads of adopters trying to find their way through this issue, not that adopters are banding together to conspire to keep birth parents from getting letterbox. FFS.

Exactly. There is a vibe of ownership that comes from some adoptive parents. It’s very much “they are mine now” which I don’t like. Even saying “I should get to name my child” negates the fact the child already has a name. What they are saying is really “I should get to rename my child” or “I should be able to take the birth mother’s name away.” Which is where the trauma comes for adoptees.

Their birth parent may have had all kinds of unknown struggles. The one thing they have given their child is their name. For many adoptees that’s all they have to hold of the person who carried them and brought them into this world. It isn’t nothing.

Again, adopters have t understand that their children will never just be their children. They will always also have birth parents. If you can’t live without complete control and being a sole parent and only family then adopting can’t be for you.

Read the UK adoptive parents FB groups and you'll find such posts, "isn't this a good reason to stop letterbox?". I rarely see any understanding that birth parents may be hardly literate - this was true in our case and we didn't expect letters from her. Phone calls were much more within her capabilities.
I see such a lot of people lacking compassion and expressing ownership. I really hope no adoptive children work out what their adoptive parents say about their birth parents.
And yes, our DCs have been damaged by their birth parents' actions. It's complicated. Life is complicated.

@the7Vabo absolutely she should write first. Contact is for the benefit of the child. My daughter would have wanted information about her birth mum - how she was doing, if she was ok, had she got help. If I had written first and had satisfied the birth mum's curiosity she would not have replied. The fact that it took her two years to write the letter proves I was right to insist she wrote first. The feelings/ needs of the birth mum don't trump the needs of the child.

Of course my daughter's birth mum is important to her especially in terms of identity. I absolutely understand that. BUT our respective roles are different - I am the "real mum" because I have done all the hard work of parenting her and bringing her up, making sure ALL her needs have been met. That has not been easy at times I can tell you. Her birth mum has given birth to her - that is of course important too. I respect the birth mum's role and I have a right to expect the birth mum to respect my role too.

Society needs to decide what it wants. If it wants adoptive parents to take, parent and treat as their own children the most traumatised and vulnerable of children then it has to allow those adoptive parents to do that. And yes part of that is claiming a child - adopted children deserve no less than to feel fully apart of the family, and to feel loved and secure in that family. Being able to call your "carers " mum and dad , is incredibly important to a child. Being able to feel loved, wanted and secure is incredibly important. Knowing that no matter what you do, what scrapes you get yourself into that your mum and dad will be there for you is important. Knowing that your mum and dad care about how you do at school is important, turning up for parents evening, going into school and sorting out the bullying issue/ lack of reasonable adjustments for your child is important. Your child knowing that you will always be in their corner is incredibly important for them - why would you not want that for adopted children?

My daughter is adopted and has a birth family that is important to her but she is also my daughter and apart of my family - with siblings, aunties, uncles, cousins and grandparents who love her very much. In relation to her name - we didn't change it even though it wasn't a name I particularly liked if I am honest but have gotten used to over the years. Yet my daughter hates her name and insists on being called something else. I have a friend who's adopted daughter has also changed her first name.

If society doesn't want children to be brought up in loving adopted homes then it should look at long term foster care. That way the child isn't "owned" by anyone and can go back and live with birth family once they are 18.

Xx

Contact only happens if it’s in the best interests of the child.

children need and want to know where they come from and contact is a way to facilitate that.

perhaps what is needed is better pre-adoption education for potential parents rather than preventing contact with birth families.

at the end of the day it’s what is right for the child not the adults - and that includes the adopting adults.

I will preface that I am an experienced adopter who does support direct and regular fun meet-ups with her birth mum for one of my two children. Nearly 20 years into my adoptive journey, I do find it interesting how adoptive parents are held to much higher account than our non-adopter peers. I see a lot of what I consider to be poor parenting day in, day out on the forums here and lots of warring separated or divorced parents. As adopters, we are not saviours or saints, we are not a homogeneous group, we are not responsible for adoption or the failings of children’s social care. We are simply human beings who want to be parents and who want to make a positive difference to children’s lives. When we get our adoption orders, we are fully the legal parents and the decisions are ours. A lot of adoption training is absolute BS and there are a lot of prescriptive myths. Also, as evidenced from this thread, the world and their wife feel entitled to comment and judge on how we do things. I’m glad that the OP started this thread as it’s been an eye opener into contemporary views of modern adoption.

@ThePieceHall fully agree with you. Xx

But what higher standards are adoptive parents being held to? The Op was specifically talking about changing a child’s name and contact with birth parents. The first doesn’t apply to separations, and for the second abuse aside, reasonable people dont support parental alienation.

A child who is adopted is legally part of a family. No one needs to “claim” them or “own” them. A child can still call adoptive parents mum & dad, and adoptive parents can do all the things listed.

It’s not parental alienation as all previous parenting rights have been removed by the family courts. The adoption order permanently severs a child from their birth parents. I’m not saying it’s right or wrong. After 20 years in, I’m not a poster girl for adoption any more. As it happens, I support direct meet-ups, I wouldn’t personally completely change names and I do understand about the importance of identity. I am totally honest with both of my children about the reason they were not allowed to live with their birth families. In age appropriate ways. I don’t disagree with much of what you say but adopters are not responsible for the failings of the system. We are parenting society’s most vulnerable children, the ones who could never be reunified with their birth families. We become the legal parents. We do what is best for our families. I don’t actually agree with a lot of what the OP has written but she is the legal parent and she has the legal right to do what she thinks is best for her new family.

Sometimes there are very good reasons for changing an adopted child’s name. My DDs’ birth brother had his name changed by his adoptive parents as they didn't live far away from his birth parents and there had been direct contact with the birth Mum whilst they had been his foster carers.

Whereas we lived further away, albeit in the same city and there had never been any direct contact. We therefore didn't change our DDs’ names, apart from removing a hyphen from DD2’s original double barreled name to create a first and middle name. This meant that it was no longer easily traceable online and the first name was a very common girl’s name.

I wasnt referring to it being parental alienation regarding adoption. I was responding to your comment about adoptive parents being held to a higher standard and you referencing what you’d seen discussed regarding separation & divorce.

What higher standard are adoptive parents being held to? People are saying children should be allowed access to birth parents which is specific to adoption.

The reality is people generally adopt because they want a child. And that child is somebody else’s biological child, that they may have baldy neglected. And that is very complicated and probably in a lot of respects harder for adoptive parents than it would be parenting a bio child. But saying adoptive parents should facilitate contact etc. isn’t holding them to a higher standard. It reflects the situation & the needs of the child.

If there is a good reason for it then it’s in the best interests of the child. That’s very different to saying I changed the child’s name because I legally can, or because bio parents can name their child so why shouldn’t I be able to.