Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
News
Original poster

Social services remove young children from grandparents and arrange adoption by gay couple

270 replies

EldonAve · 28/01/2009 07:56

Social services remove young children from grandparents and arrange adoption by gay couple

"social workers stepped in after allegedly deciding that the couple, who are aged 59 and 46, were "too old" to look after the children."

Is 46 really too old?

OP posts:
sarah293 · 28/01/2009 07:58

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

DontCallMeBaby · 28/01/2009 08:05

On the one hand, there's a lot of use of 'allegedly' in that story, ie it's only one side of the story. And the grandparents are muddying the waters (and obviously trying for extra popular appeal) by complaining about the gay couple - if this is true, it's them being taken from their family that is the issue, not who they've been given to.

On the other hand, if it's true, maybe someone should tell those of us who have wills nominating their 'elderly' parents to look after their children that they won't be deemed suitable by social services.

bran · 28/01/2009 08:31

The reason for the children being removed from their grandparents has not been revealed. I doubt it's anything to do with age at all, that's just what the grandparents are claiming. Social services are unlikely to comment on confidential reasons for the children being removed, but it's far more likely to be connected with the grandparents ability to keep the children physically or emotionally safe.

Don't worry about naming your parents as guardians in your wills, this is just sensationalist journalism IMO.

littleducks · 28/01/2009 08:31
Shock
MrsTittleMouse · 28/01/2009 08:34

I agree - I bet there's more to this than we've been told. The whole "gay couple" thing is a bit of a red herring too.

cmotdibbler · 28/01/2009 08:43

My friends brother was adopted by his grandparents who were in their late 50's and early 60's at the time, while friend went to their aunt and uncle who were in their early 30's. Brother had to deal with his parents dementia, ill health and death in his early 20's, where friend has had a much closer to normal life, and hasn't had the double orphaning of his brother.

As has been said, I think that theres more to this, and I especially dislike that they are picking out that the children have gone to a gay couple as a point of dispute

Almeida · 28/01/2009 09:08

The rc church doesn't support gay adoption or gayness at all. Perhaps they are catholic?

Original poster
EldonAve · 28/01/2009 10:03

I agree that there is bound to be more to the story
Just don't like tales of forced adoption though

OP posts:
PeachyBAHonsPRSCertOnRequest · 28/01/2009 10:05

Got to be more.

At least nobody bar my parents will want my SN boys.... an up side then!

NorbertDentressangle · 28/01/2009 10:10

I haven't read the link as I can imagine it being a very one-sided view of the situation with only half the information.

IME (having worked for Social Services Children and Families Teams) placing children with extended family is usually the preferred option unless there are circumstances which meant that it wouldn't be in the childs best interests for that to happen.

Therefore I would imagine that there is a big chunk of this story missing.

mamadiva · 28/01/2009 10:14

They were talking about this earlier on TV saying that it was totally sensationalised.

The grandparents said they wanted him to be adopted out and when he as they they then said they wanted him back [hm]

Alo the gay couple wasn't mentoned in the Daily Mail (thats what they were discussing so dont believe it ) it was a black couple earlier. Just to piss off anti gay adoptions, racists whoever they can basically the usual.

mamadiva · 28/01/2009 10:17

Well it appears not to have been in the Mail but they did say it earlier honest should read before I state.

mm22bys · 28/01/2009 11:00

It's being discussed on FiveLive at the moment. They are making it sound like they were removed from the grandparents because of concern over their health (he has angina, she diabetes).

I guess they are worried about them carking it before they get too much older. In which case, they want to get the separation from the grandparents done as early as possible.

Presuming they want to look after the kids (I got the impression from FiveLive they didt) why not let nature take its course and let the separation of the kids from their grandparents take place if / when it actually happens, and not force it?

As for the adoption by gays, my POV is that I would rather my parents (or DH's) look after them....if I had any say...

onebatmother · 28/01/2009 11:03

well of course mm - but I hope you would feel the same were the comparison to be between your parents and any unknown couple, gay or straight.

mm22bys · 28/01/2009 11:08

Oh of course!

KarlWrenbury · 28/01/2009 11:48

"The fostering arrangement worked well, but the council decided that the children should be adopted, to give them a permanent home.
The grandparents agreed - as long as they could be assured that the adoptive parents would be a loving mother and father.
The couple were then told an adoption had been arranged - but the grandfather 'hit the roof' when he discovered that the adoptive parents were two gay men"

SO it was ok when it was a "Normal " family

mm22bys · 28/01/2009 12:51

How many of us would honestly be OK with it?

I guess though the continuity would be better than being passed from foster family to foster family, or having the two brothers split up....

mm22bys · 28/01/2009 12:52

And presuming too that the grandparents either didn't want to look after them anymore or there were real reasons as to removing them (I don't consider being 56 or and 49 too old, or having angina and diabetes being too sick - hey any of us could get cancer tomorrow or be run over by a bus...)

mm22bys · 28/01/2009 12:52

Including the two adoptive parents in this case...

pagwatch · 28/01/2009 12:53

The bit aboutthis story that made me was thatthey saidthat the grandmother is too old at 45.
As a 47 year old mother of three including a 6 year old I find that shocking ( if its true)

cocolepew · 28/01/2009 12:56

I would rather the children were placed with a safe,secure loving family, regardless of the sex of the parents. It would be better than living in a care home or similar.

sorrento · 28/01/2009 13:08

Well Karl I don't think anybody including gay couples would argue they are not the typical "normal" family.
I think it's the couples health not age which is an issue, however surely it would be cheaper and better for the children for SS to support the grandparents to bring up the children or maybe they are worried about the mother being in the children's lives if they stay with the grandparents.
I have nightmares about social workers, I know two, one is lovely one is like the child catcher, it's her way or the highway, anybody who disagree's is just plain wrong or not thinking of the child

jeee · 28/01/2009 13:09

Why SS have problems: they're damned if they do and they're damned if they don't.

harleyd · 28/01/2009 13:11

i agree coco

that article is all too one-sided and has too many allegedly's

ElfOnTheTopShelf · 28/01/2009 13:16

I have no problem with gay couples being able to adopt, I have no problem with people with disabilities or obese people being able to adopt (as seems to be an issue sometimes in the papers)

What I object to is stories where it is alleged that age played a role. I find it upsetting that if something happened to me and my husband, that social services could get involved despite my wishes and remove my child from my parents care.

Swipe left for the next trending thread