'I gave back my adopted baby'

[LetThereBeRock]

I've just read this article from the Guardian about a mother who gave back her adopted son because she didn't/couldn't bond with him.

I'm planning on adopting in the near future and I'm curious to know what others think of her story.

Apologies if this has been discussed already.

SPB - DH booked a night away in a hotel for us.

I have to wonder what she would have done had no other adoptive family been found? Or one which she did not 'approve' of?

Do you think she would have then kept him?

I'm not so sure...

One question is: do they fail because they're 'forced' or because they're 'forced too late' when the child is already too damaged to ever properly get over their attachment problems?

This was not, as far as I can see, a forced adoption.

It reminded me of Julia Hollander as well, the same kind of justification - doing it for the child, almost a sacrifice.

I suppose it is better for the child to be in a family where he is loved and really wanted, but it surely does not help the attachment issues that he already has.

in the case i know very vaguely of the kid asked to go back to fostering, you can lead a horse etc.

It was very sad and everyone was a lot kinder than you lot!

feel desperately sorry for the child he's just had his feelings of rejection confirmed, again. Do wonder if the adoption procedures are adequate in this instance.

forced adoption - child removed by social services rather than given up by parents?
bet he'l be very good for his new mum

I think it unwise to judge.... parenting a child with Attachment Disorder can be soul destroying. She believes that she cannot give this little boy what he needs emotionally. Unfortunately,nobody within the family managed to bond with him so her feeling of failure would be magnified.
I really hope that his new family have the experience to get through his barriers and teach him how to connect.
You can read all about attachment (as she did) but it's a hard concept unless you have experienced it first hand.

I read the article and thought the 'mother' was treating the adopted child like an exotic commodity, purchased from abroad to satisfy her feelings, not his. And when it didn't turn out to meet her imagined scenario, she effectively sent him back. And seems to want us to feel sorry for her.

I am reminded of a thread from earlier in the week when people were waxing incredibly indignant about a person who wanted to return a dog to its breeder because for whatever reason she didn't want it any more. Here, the majority view seems to be 'how sad for her/him'. And this is a person.

I see what you are saying, shockers- but I think the angle of her testimony, claiming that her motivation was to 'give him a better home' is disingenuous.

I suspect she would have given him up even if there were no suitable family for him to go to.

Had she held her hands up and said 'I just couldn't cope', then I would have drawn different conclusions from the article.

It is incredibly sad for the boy and for her; but only one of them is making money out of the whole sorry situation.

I don't agree that wanting to adopt when one is able to have biological children is odd.

Perhaps it seems that way, but I've always wanted to adopt, even before I was aware of my fertility issues.

I'm under no illusions about how difficult the whole process can be,and that a great many children who have been given up/taken from their parents and placed in the system have emotional issues such as RAD.

Surely she'd have been made aware of that while going through the adoption process,and perhaps while the full reality of it doesn't hit until the child is in your home, I do think that she gave up on him very easily because he didn't behave and bond as her biological children did.

I know a bit about this case. The author actually didn't have 5 kids when she adopted this baby - she had 2 after getting him.

It's pretty obvious that she has mental health issues. And as bad as the system is in this country, at least someone like her would never be allowed to adopt. Only in America ...

I don't think there is anything that says that adopting when you already have children has to be a bad idea. My parents already had 3 when they adopted internationally and I think that actually made things easier: they had experience so their expectations weren't too high on what the child-parent thing is like, or that it has to feel exactly the same every time to be valid. Or perhaps they were just more sensible people.

She does seem to have very high expectations.

I agree Dittany re Dan's belongings. It may seem silly but the belongings are part of their identity and history imho and it doesn't seem right to discard them so casually.
Also when the child has been moved around so much it seems even more important that they have familiar items in order that there's at least one constant in their lives.

gosh I missed that about the belongings; that's so sad

my little brother arrived clutching a small plastic doll which he kept on his shelf with other ornaments once he had grown out of it: the little outfit and cap he arrived in were lovingly packed away in tissue paper by my mother

that and the letter and photo the adoption authorities sent us before his arrival are his equivalent of the baby photos of the rest of us: it's his history

the whole idea of making a fresh start sounds a bit grim

I'm just really surprised she was allowed to adopt him with that many young birth children already in the mix. I am an approved adopter with one birth child, and social services were really strict about making us wait till dd is at least two years older than any child we adopt. Plus, there are many children we won't be considered for because they have been judged to need to be the only child in the family, or the youngest by a wide margin. It's obvious that some children have been so traumatised that they need far more attention than a mother of three can give them. No wonder she couldn't make progress with his attachment issues.

But I do feel sorry for her. Adoptions do break down, and some children turn out to be so traumatised that ordinary parenting just isn't enough.

This wasn't a traumatised older child. This was a baby. The only one causing him any trauma was the awful woman who adopted him.

She made a career out of this kid's adoption, you know. She wrote columns and blogs, and I think she did the chat show circuit. She even wrote an article about how she could never give up her adopted child. This was a few months before she wrote another, blaming him for his failure to 'attach'.

This baby was treated like a plaything, like a doll. The author wanted to adopt a baby and like a spoilt kid used to getting her own way, she was allowed to adopt a baby (despite being completely unsuitable) because she stampted her foot hard enough.

People like her shouldn't be allowed to have kids. In fact, I think they should take the other four off her.

Wow. That made me look at my two year old son and imagine someone giving him away, and that has made me cry.
Children are not our possessions to keep or discard.
That's the most distressing thing I've ever read. If it had been a tiny baby, who could not express themselves, maybe I could have some understanding for her...but she kept him for two years. That's a long time in a little boys life. He was old enough to understand, he would have been extremely distressed in his new home, asking for his mummy no doubt.

What a horrible, horrible woman.

it also strikes me that he was 'her' son not 'their' son - dad rarely around and it doesn't really sound like he was a dad to him at all (if any of the others, I don't know)

agree abbie. he has now been let down by 2 sets of parents. I bet he'll never really trust the next ones - he'll be on permanent best behaviour

Read it at the weekend - she really doesn't come across well, does she?