Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Telly addicts

finding mum and dad.....

325 replies

crikeybill · 15/01/2014 22:52

On channel 4. Holy Christ I'm sobbing. I've tried turning it over but I have to know if someone adopts them....

OP posts:
barkingtreefrog · 18/01/2014 11:05

angels thanks for sharing your experience. I can still remember going to visit my adopted sister at her foster home, and just from the bond I've had with my fostered and adopted siblings that's one element that doesn't worry me. If we do get as far as adoption I would definitely consider a child 5+. If I'm going to miss the pregnancy I may as well miss the potty training as well Wink (said with tongue firmly in cheek). I have actually thought about it a lot, and amongst other reasons, by the time we got through the adoption process all our friends (who are currently pg or have babies/toddlers) would have children of that age anyway. As I'm already mid thirties it makes sense to me. I'm also a primary teacher so with that as well as being brought up alongside numerous younger siblings (some of whom had birth mothers younger than me) I am more comfortable with children than an average child free person might be. My best mate always joked that she wouldn't leave her kids with anyone, but she felt like leaving them with me was fine as I seemed to know what to do better than she did!

This time next year we could be starting the long process! I think knowing that there is a child at the end of it even if not from your own body, assuming we are approved, makes the ttc journey slightly more bearable.

Kewcumber · 18/01/2014 11:19

I too came to the end of the IVF journey (excluding using donor eggs which I decided against) before feeling ready to move on to adoption. It was only having got to that horrible cold prickly sinking feeling when IVF failed for the last time that I eventually became able to let go of the usual dream of pregnancy, new born baby etc. Suggesting to anyone before they've reached that point that they consider adoption (and even at that time IMO) runs the risk of a brick applied to the back of your head. Unless you know them well enough to have hidden the brick first.

On the other hand - the pain of infertility and having to let go of the usual ideal of family has made me more empathetic and more able to parent DS through his losses.

Italiangreyhound · 18/01/2014 12:32

scarlet5tyger thanks for sharing. Very good to read people's different experiences.

We have a birth DD and I wanted to have another birth child. After over 6 years of fertility treatment, including donor eggs, nothing having worked, I put it aside. It is quite hard to decribe how addictive the whole process can become! We funded ourselves from some money we came into. I am very sorry that money is gone and sad it took so long to come to the end of it all (various complications elongated the experience so it was not constant treatment for 6 years it was lots of waiting in between!). However, I am now fully on board with adoption, ready for it, and no longer grieving the fact I won't have another birth child. Each person's journey is so personal, I know I am so lucky to have what I have in the family I have got and each person who experiences infertility must decide at what point they are ready to move on.

Now adoption feels like a huge adventure and although very scared I feel ready!

Good luck to all who are trying to create or expand their families in whatever way.

m0llyr0se · 18/01/2014 13:04

Totally with Devora and Lilyaldrin - having been through the process recently we watched it and it all felt very raw... we nearly went to an activity day but found our son a week before so cancelled our places...
I defy anyone - whether they are up for adopting or not - not to want to take all of the children home with them and give them the love and forever family they deserve.
BUT

m0llyr0se · 18/01/2014 13:09

;) ... the reality is that you need to find the best fit for you own family and if you do just take the first - or second - child that comes along without really thinking about their likes / dislikes / personality etc etc etc, then the placement runs the risk of breaking down - which means the child is rejected in a much worse way...
The programme did the couple a disservice IMHO but not explaining the process they had been through in terms of spending months talking to their SW about what they could / could not cope with and the kind of child who would fit best with their family / support network etc... and you do feel like you are rejecting children but you always hope that they will be a perfect match for another adopter...
I have total respect for the fact that they were prepared to be filmed doing such a personal and difficult thing...

BerylThePeril44 · 18/01/2014 13:51

I find programmes
like this very difficult. Foster carers are portrayed as selfless angels and adoptive parents as selfish and uncaring. I'm sure many foster carers are wonderful caring people, but let's not forget they take children on a short term basis and are PAID! Adopters make a life long commitment to a child, often at great personal, emotional and financial cost to themselves and their families. I am speaking as an adopter to a so called 'hard to place' child. Love them to bits and wouldn't change a thing...but it has been and is extremely challenging. I also have a birth child so know of the differences in parenting which are required. Stop judging adoptive parents for trying to do the right thing...

m0llyr0se · 18/01/2014 13:56

Ooops... new to these boards and didn't realise there were loads more pages... rookie mistake ;)

NanaNina · 18/01/2014 15:27

I think it is a great shame Beryl that you have introduced this note of conflict into this thread and I don't think anyone on the thread has made comments about foster carers "being portrayed as selfless angels and adoptive parents as selfish and uncaring." OK there have been many post about good foster carers, notably Katie as she was the only carer who was seen for any length of time on the programme and that of course was because the focus was on finding adopters for Connor and Daniel. She was a very caring foster carer and clearly loved the children but there are hundreds of other carers out there who are just like Katie. I think the thing was that for many people who have posted, it was the first time they have seen a foster carer and they were moved by her love of the boys and her wish for them to be adopted.

I don't think anyone has said adopters are "selfish and uncaring" - maybe there were one or two negative posts about the couple who didn't make any emotional connection with any of the children at the party. However many experienced carers and adopters came along to point out that it would have been a difficult thing for them to do, knowing that they were being monitored by social workers and being filmed at the same time. Some adopters pointed out that they had turned down children as they did not think they were the right fit and some are still feeling sad about the children they did turn down.

Until your post, I thought this thread was remarkable as so many foster carers and adopters (and prospective foster carers and adopters) have been able to tell their "story" in such an honest way and I'm sure they have all appreciated hearing of each other's struggles over IVF failures and embarking on the journey to adopt a child.

NanaNina · 18/01/2014 16:07

Italiangreyhound you asked why I said that the chances of children like Scott and Daniel and Connor being permanent fostered are extremely remote. I'll try to explain.

When a child has been removed from parents and care proceedings have been initiated in the Family Courts (which means that the LA are asking the Court to make a specific Order on a child to remove Parental Responsibility from the parents) the social worker with case responsibility has to make a care plan for the child for his/her future care. This is so that the Judge knows how the LA intend to secure the child's future before he grants an Order.

In some cases the plan will be for the child to be cared for by a member of the extended family, a grandparent or other lose relative, and they will usually be asking for a special Order called a Special Guardianship Order (which is just one step away from adoption)

In cases where there is no suitable person in the extended family then the care plan will depend to a great extent on the age of the child and whether it is a large sibling group, whether the child has disabilities etc. LAs vary in what they believe is feasible for a child's future dependent on the circumstances. I think most LAs would have a care plan of adoption for a child under 10, and if there were just 2 siblings. In large sibling groups consideration would be given to splitting the siblings to give the younger ones the opportunity of adoption (as was the case with Scott's younger sister who had been adopted)

Most adopters want a child as young as possible but others will consider a child up to the age of around 7 or 8 or even older. I have been retired for 9 years so things might have changed but I don't think so. Certainly before I retired there were difficulties getting children over 5 adopted (especially if they were boys) although I think it was Lilka who gave stats to show that just as many boys as girls were adopted. Children with disabilities were another group of children deemed hard to place. Other factors to be taken into account was the child's background and how he/she had been affected, children who had learning disabilities, ADHD, AS, Autism etc or physical disabilities.

SO a care plan will be made that is thought to be realistic. For children under 5 in sib groups of 2 and where there were no other complications, the care plan would definitely be adoption and this might be the case for older children say children under 10, though most social workers would know that it would be unlikely that a child of this age would be adopted. The fact is that the older the child is the chances of adoption become more remote.

Children awaiting adoption would try to be matched with approved adopters and many of them were, but for those that weren't (usually older boys or where there were large sib groups, or children with disabilities) they would be featured in the BAAF "Be My Parent" publication and "Adoption UK" and there will be pictures and a brief account. I think these publications are now available to view online.

IF no adopters were forthcoming, then the next best thing would be to think of permanent fostering. You ask if there is a shortage of permanent foster carers and the answer is decidedly YES. It isn't a question of finance because all foster carers (short term or permanent) are paid fostering allowances and these payments are mandatory.

Most people wanting to add to their family on a permanent basis will be thinking in terms of adoption and people wanting to help care for children but not add to their family will be thinking in terms of short term foster carers. SO there are few people coming along to foster a child who has not been able to be adopted, on a permanent basis, because they don't fit into either category and of course these will be children who have been waiting to be adopted and might have moved between foster homes and their behaviours may be difficult as a result. I hate to say this, but it isn't a very attractive proposition is it?

The most successful way of getting a permanent foster home for a child was if he/she was placed with short term carers and they decided that they wanted to keep the child on a permanent basis but needed to know that fostering allowances would be paid, and that the LA were "behind them" if they needed support. I can recall several of these cases and they were highly successful for obvious reasons.

I think you mentioned finance and is fostering a Job as such? Years ago it was thought that foster carers needed to be altruistic and that payments would attract the wrong people. Thank goodness we have moved on from such nonsense! It is recognised now that foster carers actually need to be paid allowances for the up keep of the child on a day to day basis, but also a "reward element" for the task or job that they are doing in caring for these children. Foster carers have mortgages/rents/bills etc like everyone else. The trouble is that payments cannot be guaranteed for 52 weeks of the year as there is no guarantee that children will be placed on a continuous basis, so foster carers have to have a contingency plan for such times. I have known foster carers who childmind so that they can afford to foster!

I'm sure you know that adoption allowances are now paid but it is important to note that these payments are discretionary and are reviewed on an annual basis and can be decreased or even stopped, though I don't know if that has ever happened.

You asked about post adoption support and I think the reason that it is often not provided is because of staff shortages. All LAs on a national basis are as I think you said "cash strapped" because of the immense cuts that are being made by this govt. At the same time they are wanting improved services with fewer resources. It can't be done. I don't think it takes much working out does it!

Hope I haven't confused you too much.

MrsBW · 18/01/2014 16:29

Although a strange thing virtually anyone can do ivf no checks etc but so many checks it seems before adoption

The adoption checks aren't in place to make sure you'll be a good parent.

They're in place to make sure you can parent a traumatised child who has been abused and/or neglected.

Big difference.

BerylThePeril44 · 18/01/2014 18:09

Nana Nina ...If you look back at my post you will see I stated that it was the programme which I found difficult and not the conversation on here. That has been very interesting. The programme did imply those attitudes. My daughters fc was amazing, we still see her regularly. However I also know lots of brilliant adoptive parents, some who have made a life long commitment to sibling groups of four or more...absolutely awesome:-)

BookroomRed · 18/01/2014 19:49

I don't think the documentary implied that foster carers were angels and adoptive parents selfish at all. The only fosterer we saw in any real detail (Katy) seemed caring and committed, and the only parents who had actually adopted were that equally nice couple who adopted Thomas, the toddler with a heart condition - surely they could hardly be described as 'selfish and uncaring'?

The couple who dressed up and attended the first adoption party seemed likeable, vulnerable and somewhat out of their depth - which is hardly surprising in the circumstances. Am I remembering rightly, or had they not even been approved as adopters yet, they were just being sent along as part of the process to gain some experience of what kinds of children were awaiting matching? What made you think they were shown as uncaring? Just the fact that they didn't move ahead and adopt from that party?

I'm neither an adopter nor an adoptee, but from what I see on here and in RL, one of the things that makes adopters impatient is continually being described as unrealistically 'angelic'. I think adopters often welcome media representations that honour the difficulties they face in parenting traumatised children who have lost their birth families, but which also depicts them as ordinary people who adopt because they want a child, not because they're St Francis of Assisi...?

scarlet5tyger · 18/01/2014 19:58

I'm actually quite upset by Beryl's highlighting of the fact that Foster Carers are paid. Why is this even an issue?? I'm "paid" just over £100 per week for each child I care for. Out of this I have to pay for food, clothing, toys, days out, nappies, milk, equipment (how much does a decent pram cost? car seat? cot? all of which have to be of a decent standard and often replaced with each child) and petrol for often daily contact (a round trip of 16 miles). On top of that there's my bills, mortgage, insurance (higher for foster carers) etc.

I foster pre-school children and as part of my contact I'm not allowed to have another job. These children absolutely need a full time parent, and usually 24 hours a day.

I survive on Income support and my own savings.

I don't want to be portrayed as a selfless angel, as I do love what I do. But I'm certainly upset if someone implies that I don't deserve to have the work I do recognised as other professionals are.

MyFeetAreCold · 18/01/2014 20:17

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Italiangreyhound · 18/01/2014 21:06

NanaNina thanks that has explained a lot.

I am just shooting the breeze and trying to understand the system so I really hope I will not offend anyone with my comments.

With all respect to all the explanations I am still somewhat confused about foster care in that no one does a job for expenses alone. If I were going into my work place and being paid the cost of my petrol and lunch money I would be considered a volunteer and not an employee. Just so you know this is not viewing a volunteer as any lower than an employee. I guess maybe I am saying I think foster careers should be paid more for the amazing work they do.

I think most foster carers would be doing the 'job' because they want to care for children, there must be a thousand ways to make more money.

Maybe some adopters should also recieve more assistance, especially if their children have additional needs that cost extra money. I sometimes feel we as a nation are not prepared to pick up the cost of our high standards of child care. We want all children to be brought up in a loving home but when behavioural issues or whatever threaten that is there the money for therapy and help, is there post adoption support?

NanaNina are some counties better than others and where does one find out?

I think fosters and adopters all do a brilliant job (I am currently neither), I am going through the process of adoption. If one day I ever had the energy I might even consider fostering because I love kids, have certain skills as a parent (don't ask my daughter she may disagree) and I can see from my own experiences and from mumsnet adoption threads (and the conversations of people who do such an amazing job) that both can totally change lives.

I so much hope I can have a good relationship with the foster carer of the child we adopt. scarlet5tyger any hints on how to make that happen?

I wonder if a more flexible approach within social services about foster care and adoption might help? Could the foster carers of the two boys have become long term foster carers?

Space may also be a factor - you need seperate bedrooms for the children and many homes only have three bedrooms, thus limiting the number of children to 2, with sibling groups of more than 2 how do families cope? Children who are birth siblings and are then adopted share a room?

I hope my comments have not caused offence I am just thinking it all through in my head in a very jumbled way! Confused

I so much hope the documentary makers will update us on those children (annonymously of course!).

naty1 · 18/01/2014 21:59

It would be nice if adopters could revive a similar amount as fosterers (as the gov would be paying for the child in fc anyway.)
The stability for the child would make the cost worth it

NanaNina · 19/01/2014 01:39

As you say bookendred there was nothing in the programme to imply that foster carers were angels and adopters selfish at all so I'm not sure why Beryl gave that as her reason for her comments which I found a little offensive. I agree Scarlet that it was insensitive to mention the fact that foster carers are paid...........of course you need to be paid, and there are adoption allowances although they are I think means tested and are discretionary, so maybe Beryl's income is too high for adoption allowances to be made.)

It seemed to me that it was you Beryl that was making the distinction between short term foster carers who are PAID (your caps) while you have "made a life long commitment to a child." It certainly sounded to me that you were seeing yourself as superior in some way to foster carers because they were not prepared to make a "life long commitment to a child." No one forced you to do that. Sorry I don't want to de-rail this thread with conflict but I felt I had to make a response to your post.

NanaNina · 19/01/2014 01:51

Scarlet that sounds a very low rate of pay and seems to be the allowance for the day to day expenditure on a child. Do you not receive a "reward element" or "fee" for the job that you are doing. The LA where I worked were paying £100 a week for fostering allowances for under 5's with an additional "fee" for the work that they did, some 12 years ago!!! I can't believe that you are expected to purchase all the equipment for the children. We supplied everything that was needed together with an initial clothing grant and grants for birthday and Christmas presents, and a holiday grant. We also supplied beds, cots, wardrobes, chests of drawers etc. You are being seriously underpaid.

Do you have a foster care support group. There was a very thriving foster carer support group in the LA I worked in - they did informal stuff (like coffee mornings I each other's houses and picnics in the summer, but also formal meetings, where issues of interest/concern were discussed.. Sometimes they would invite social workers along if there was something specific they wanted to bring to our attention. This group was very influential and there was a similar group in every area of the County Council and twice yearly the entire County group would meet and these meetings were attended by the Director of SS and members of the SS Committee and carers were well able to get their views across and many changes were made as a result of these meetings.

If you don't have one, you could start one. I'm sure Fostering Network would be helpful with advice on setting one up.

BerylThePeril44 · 19/01/2014 21:30

I don't think adopters should be paid. I work very hard, as many mothers, do to support my children. They are my responsibility, whether through birth or adoption. Of course, foster carers should be paid. They are professionals and carry out an extremely important and highly skilled role. That is actually my point! Adoption and Fostering are completely different, but both should be valued equally.
At no point on this thread have I criticized any individual posters, yet personal comments and unfair assumptions have definitely been directed at me! Maybe an example of how adopters are portrayed, particularly in the media and even by social workers, themselves.

beannie36 · 20/01/2014 13:49

I think the social services should ask all the adoptive parents to be to spend at least a few minutes with each child rather than go on their looks which clearly alot of them done!!! Credit to Katy and her husband for their wonderful work and not getting the boys hopes up too much as it would have been so hard telling them they werent picked.x

MrsBW · 20/01/2014 14:49

No adopter would decide whether they could successfully parent a child based on their looks. Hmm

The programme (rightly) just didn't delve into Daniel and Connor's personal backgrounds and give the Great British public the information that potential adopters would see.

You say it's hard to tell the children they haven't been picked' but in the same post, advocate children meeting multiple adopters and facing multiple 'rejections'... Which is it to be?

scarlet5tyger · 20/01/2014 17:39

MrsBW sadly my own experience (as a foster carer) indicates only too clearly that adopters CAN base their decision on looks (although I stress not all adopters would). That's why often parents aren't shown pictures, DVDs etc until they've made a decision.

Nananina, as always your comments are invaluable and I won't derail this thread with more talk about money. Except to say that I didn't "shop around" wisely when choosing which LA to foster for. And sadly we've actually had a pay CUT this year. It's hard to argue against though when over a third of my LAs Social Workers have lost their jobs. Now THAT is something I'd like to see a documentary made about! Lets see the government put a positive spin on the atrocious state their children's social services are actually in.

MrsBW · 20/01/2014 17:48

Scarlet, I find that really interesting...

How do you know adopters base their decisions on looks?(genuine question)

MrsBW · 20/01/2014 17:52

Sorry, just reread your post... Because sometimes adopters aren't shown pictures/dvd's.

I've not heard of that happening (no pictures/dvd's).

Looks will play a part in my decision ... But from the point of view that both me and my husband have dark hair and dark eyes. If we had blond/blonde haired blue eyed children, I'd worry they'd be faced with the 'you don't look like your parents' comment when with us, which may cause them distress.

No other reason.

Italiangreyhound · 20/01/2014 18:04

I wonder how anyone can know that an adopter has based their decision only on mostly on looks? That is a genuine question. The fact some authorities do not show picture may be to stop that influencing people or it might be for security issues (might it - question again?).