AIBU to think adopted children need a mother figure?

[Bertiebiscuit]

Men should not be allowed to adopt children. All children need a mother.

I respect your POV too though I don't agree.

'Im not familiar with the stats for state care, or other types of carers, but I dont agree with the stance that "anything is better than care".
What about the child being raised in the wilderness by a pack of wolves, is that better than care?'

• this does seem somewhat offensive to me , though I appreciate it was intended facetiously : surely you don't think being raised by 2 women, 1 woman etc is likely to be such a terrible experience?

The stats for state care are worse than adoption though there are various reasons for this.

May I ask if you are Catholic? I understand if you'd rather not say: your stance on 'not meant to have children ' seemed a bit similar to natural law Catholic ideas to me.

I do understand this view but imo something not being the ideal doesn't mean it shouldn't happen. If, say, 2 women are having a child, I think they should use a known donor and ensure as much contact as possible.

Otoh in adoption, the child has already been separated from their biological parents.
Re care homes : carers there are often very good but they are still often working shifts, ultimately doing a job, having to care for multiple children, and may not be able to be there permanently. One of the primary securities adoption and to some extent foster care offers is that they're distinct from those things.

It's also worth noting care home staff are predominately female (87%) although there are men who do it too.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cdp-2022-0142/&ved=2ahUKEwjNvKH6pJeVAxU8Z0EAHQUPPH0QFnoECCAQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3PtE3SuIjyMulC3huUVdFW

Really the only other countries with similar adoption systems to the UK ie the state removing children and putting them up for adoption are the US and Canada, and since you can also adopt privately there, it's not exactly the same.

Other countries insist on parental agreement and have no history of adoption so there isn't the infrastructure. This is why people in eg France went abroad to adopt babies as the main way of adopting.

In these other countries, a lot of children do stay with birth family. In a lot of cases though there is more of an extended family network to step in and help where the parents are struggling. Here it is all aboutvthe nuclear family. For those who can't stay at home, there are institutions.

I don’t have an opinion either way, but it’s not aboit gay vs straight. It’s about 2x men. People would be just as unhappy with 1x straight man.

Everyone who said ‘I do not support gay men adopting’ is fine with 2x women, because women are much less likely to perpetrate SA.

Have you seen that single man - an Asian man at that, who takes on terminally ill children from care and nurses them through end of life?

there are many single men adopting. Quite often they take on the kids no one else wants and have no chance of being adopted. Because they aren’t first choice precisely because they are single men.

there are plenty of examples of children being severely abused and killed in homes with two heterosexual biological parents. And in homes with single mums.

it’s not about men. Men can abuse if married, hetersexual, gay or single. IMO it’s more about social services being overstretched so these cases slip through the cracks.

I think so, was he the Middle Eastern adoptive father in the US one who was currently looking after a very ill baby girl (if I recall correctly)? He was absolutely amazing.

Some people really do have kind hearts and are just put on earth to help others. I think they’re a rare breed of people but there’s no questioning these people, you can just see it. There’s no way JV and JMF could ever be mistaken for this kind of person.

This is why I’m neutral/no strong opinion

We’ve just got to look at data and statistics and make the decisions on the information available to us
Statistically are two gay men most likely to abuse a child ? Probably not.

Either. The world isn't actually crawling with pedophiles and psychopaths, it is on Mumsnet obviously. But in reality . . . not really.

Obviously the meeting is cancelled if someone is intoxicated, a provision of seeing the child or children is that the person has to be sober when they show up.

The whole ‘would you rather your lost child seeks help from a woman or a man’ inadvertently makes quite a good point.

Because the real question is would you rather your lost child seeks help from someone who looks helpful and safe, or to wander the streets not seeking any help?

Because those advocating that men should not be allowed to adopt are choosing the option of their child wandering the streets rather than asking the guy in a shop for help because he’s a man.

Kinship care/Kinship adoption is nearly always a better outcome for the child.
I agree that not nearly enough effort or support is available for this type of care. It's definitely worth it and should be more the norm.

Not all biological family members are abusive. A child, where it's safe, has better outcomes. There are various academic and mental health studies that come to that conclusion.

Nobody really, well maybe a tiny minority, thinks that sw are snatching children from loving, non abusive bio parents. A bit of a smarmy comment there.

Seriously? Just cancel the meeting? Maybe try again next month? There is no way this is allowed. The impact on the child of meetings being cancelled like this is enormous.

Many bio parent/s lose their children because of mental health issues, relationships breakdowns and being medicated for being at risk of future harm for the issues you've just described you and your partner suffered. That's food for thought I think. Many adopted children do not receive the pre and post adoption mental health services they deserve either. The adoption system's a mess and needs more funding and a complete change.

Biological parents seem to be held to a hire standard than adoptive fund that’s for sure.

Unsure as why you've come to that conclusion based on my comment.

Hardly.

Other countries insist on parental agreement and have no history of adoption so there isn't the infrastructure. This is why people in eg France went abroad to adopt babies as the main way of adopting.

In these other countries, a lot of children do stay with birth family. In a lot of cases though there is more of an extended family network to step in and help where the parents are struggling. Here it is all aboutvthe nuclear family.

• I didn't know that, thank you...it's striking UK has such a different approach.

So in countries with stronger extended family networks, there's more opportunity for kinship care? That sounds better. A lot would need to change here for that be possible more often, I suppose.

'For those who can't stay at home, there are institutions' - Institutions seem to have worse outcomes here but is this different elsewhere? If so, I wonder what other countries do differently?

I'm sorry for more questions, I understand if you don't want to discuss any more.

Fine, eventually they will meet, maybe once the child is a teenager and can understand better.

They can reunited at 18 of course, when the adoptee is no longer a child and can make his/her own decisions. Sometimes it happens earlier - some yp go searching on social media for example or run away and go back to birth family.

I have known countless adoptive families and most have children older than 18 now and I am struggling to think of any where reunion with birth family has worked out well longer term. There is such a gap in experiences and expectations and often the children are very angry, looking for answers rather than a relationship. It's a very complex area.

Yes, very complex.

And with women, one woman will probably have the stronger maternal urges, this could lead to jealousy from the other woman and she could harm the baby maybe?

• this statement seems unwarranted. Most lesbian couples have one bio and one non bio mother (unless they used reciprocal IVF in which case the non bio mum will have carried the egg and contributed epigenetically). Most lesbian couples do not have huge issues with jealousy, and cases of babies being harmed by lesbians are no higher than by straight women.

Incidentally, while Star Hobson is sometimes cited as a case of this (and there ARE cases of this) I'd argue it's more relevant that the murderess came into Star's life some time after her birth. The relationship did not exist before. In that sense it's no different from a case where a stepfather harms children, presumably often at least partly due to possessiveness and desire to have mother's full attention