Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

No legal aid = baby adopted

943 replies

CFSKate · 09/10/2015 07:54

I saw this on Channel 4 News yesterday, I only saw it part way through, but it went something like this, there was a couple who were accused of abusing their child, they couldn't get legal aid, the court had the child adopted, and then it went to court again and new evidence said there was a medical condition and the parents weren't guilty of abuse, but the adoption is final, they can't get their baby back.

OP posts:
Lemonfizzypop · 09/10/2015 17:55

Which, by the way is a completely horrific and disrespectful way to talk about a mother who has and will be going through agony right now.

BigChocFrenzy · 09/10/2015 17:56

FuckedOff A friend learned in her 20s she was adopted. She was still sorting herself out in her 50s. Not a century ago.

I was worried, not that the child wouldn't be told about adoption, but how they dealt with learning it was a miscarriage of justice. That their biological parents were totally innocent.
Would the adoptive parents explain that at age 5 say, or let them find out later ?

jacks365 · 09/10/2015 17:56

Irrespective of what has happened in a criminal court in the family court the adoption was given the go ahead, that adoption is still legal. There are many many children living happily with adoptive parents whose birth parents have never faced a trial for abuse or neglect simply because the level of proof is different. We can not say beyond a shadow of a doubt with the information we have that the family court would have found differently if this had come to light sooner, it may not have made a difference. As things stand that child's legal parents are the ones who adopted them, they are the ones who are now responsible legally for the child not the birth parents. The adopters would be failing in their duty to that child to just hand them back to the birth parents. No matter how we feel about this it needs to go through the proper process even if that needs making up but what can not happen is the child just handed back to it's birth parents without a legal process being put in place for one thing they no longer have pr.

StormyBlue · 09/10/2015 17:57

Xenia, I was referring to "If my adoptive parents had told me they hadn't handed me over to my biological parents in this situation I would have hated them and gone nc when I was able". Later the poster said that the first question of adopted children is why were they not able to stay with their birth parents, and would be devastated if they were given a legal mistake as an answer. Another adopted PP has backed the up.

Just proves what I said - no one is listening to those who have actually been through it!

RussianTea · 09/10/2015 17:57

'Going back to where he came from' 3 years ago Bobo. It's a child not lost luggage.

BoboChic · 09/10/2015 17:58

Sure, jacks, there is legal procedure to consider.

But the real issue at stake is where this poor child has the greatest chance of growing up happily.

UnlikelyPilgramage · 09/10/2015 17:59

The problem is Russian, there is 'ownership' to an extent, isn't there - hence custody battles and why adoption in its current form exists.

BoboChic · 09/10/2015 17:59

It doesn't matter how much time has elapsed. His natural parents will bond with him instantly and that bond will help him bond very quickly with them.

Devora · 09/10/2015 17:59

RussianTea, I think many, many posters are saying the only possible ok outcome is for the child to live with the birth parents. And that the only other option is for the child to stay with the adoptive parents in a state of ignorance. These are not the only two options and it is daft to pretend it's just an either/or.

BoboChic, it is ridiculous to assert that moving to the birth parents at this stage would not feel like a move to the child. You think she will just breathe out and think, "Aaah, I'm home!"? Really?

BoboChic · 09/10/2015 18:02

Devora - it is highly probable that this child will settle very quickly indeed with her natural parents.

F0rmerlyKnownAsXenia · 09/10/2015 18:03

Lemon - that's poster is talking about how she imagines she would feel in that situation .she is not taking about what is in the interest of the child in question .

No one on this thread know what that is, because we don't know all the facts.

And that poster isn't even claiming to have been through " it " ie adopted because of a miscarriage of justice . So I'm not sure why you are suggesting she has .

UnlikelyPilgramage · 09/10/2015 18:04

Devora, I am absolutely not advocating a move overnight as it were, but any type of shared custody is difficult.

In theory, the child should feel he has two homes where he is welcome and loved. In practice, I wonder if it would feel more like 'not really belonging anywhere' - especially if both families go on to have subsequent children.

What if there were, as there very probably would be, differences of opinion over parenting, over diet, over schoolwork? What about legal positions (wills, life insurance) and about money?

I understand and respect what you're saying. I really do. But I feel the only kind way - the only sane way - is for a child to be with his parents and I know you agree on this - that unless there is abuse or neglect or severe risk of - that should be with the birth parent(s).

jacks365 · 09/10/2015 18:04

But the real issue at stake is where this poor child has the greatest chance of growing up happily.

I'm not disputing that nor am I saying whether the child should stay where they are or be returned to the birth parents all I am saying is that it does need to go through proper legal channels, it can not just be a case of handing the child back. If the decision is made to keep the child where it is then that decision is not the adoptive parents to make, they have no more right to just hand the child back than the birth parents do to just take the child.

Devora · 09/10/2015 18:04

UnlikelyPilgrimage, I didn't say what I thought was the best option - I don't know nearly enough about this situation to know what the best way forward would be. I just said that I wouldn't just carry on as normal, neither would I just hand the child over. You would hope that both sets of parents can have a relationship with the child, but that will depend on the ability of both to be wise and patient both most of our capability. They probably won't be able to share parenting - the child needs a settled home - but they need enough contact for the child to have genuine relationships with all.

Really, really hard.

Lemonfizzypop · 09/10/2015 18:04

What I also don't understand about this case is the reports that the child won't have any contact with it's birth parents at ALL. Even if it is felt that it would be in the child's best interest to stay with the adoptive parents, surely some sort of relationship with the biological parents would be beneficial?

F0rmerlyKnownAsXenia · 09/10/2015 18:04

Bobo - do you have any qualifications or experience in this field ? I'd love to know how you know this .

BoboChic · 09/10/2015 18:05

Experience but I cannot talk about it publicly.

Devora · 09/10/2015 18:06

BoboChic do you have any expertise in this area?

Lemonfizzypop · 09/10/2015 18:07

How do you explain to a child they cannot see their biological parents because people thought they might be hurting him/her but it turns out they were wrong? How will that make any sense?

Devora · 09/10/2015 18:08

Ah sorry, crossed posts. BoboChic, I understand you cannot talk about your experience publicly, but equally you can't present your assertion as fact. We just don't know, do we?

SisterMoonshine · 09/10/2015 18:08

"Do you think that the courts should be able to take your kids away from a safe, loving and happy home because they think another set of parents would be even better? I suspect not. '

That's what happened as far as the birth parents and child are concerned.

BoboChic · 09/10/2015 18:09

There are plenty of historical cases of DC being separated from natural parents through war or immigration. It doesn't "break the bond".

F0rmerlyKnownAsXenia · 09/10/2015 18:09

Then maybe you can tell us about attachment and trauma and how It will all work with this child. Since you think it's " highly probable" that he will settle and that his parents will" bond with him instantly " .

I'm assuming you know the child and family well ?

Devora · 09/10/2015 18:09

Who's talking about a child not being able to see their biological parents, Lemonfizzypop? That's something different entirely from disagreeing that this child should automatically be handed back to them.

Lightbulbon · 09/10/2015 18:09

I haven't read the whole thread but it got me thinking of the scenario if the birth family have another child who then develops a health condition that requires a donor. The removed birth child could be a match. It is ridiculous that we have a legal system that could prevent contact in this situation.

There is good reason why other countries don't do closed adoptions at all.