finding mum and dad.....

[crikeybill]

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

It's totally counter intuitive to not allow foster parents to adopt! At least how I see it.

Thank goodness for Lilka Devora Scarlet Kew etc who have actually adopted themselves.

I'm not sure about the Adoption parties either. I think on balance that if it means some children are matched in this way, then they are a good idea. I wondered about the dressing up though, as I think it tended to make the children a bit over excited and there was a lot of dashing about. Obviously they children needed to be able to play and be entertained - maybe a conjurer or something similar. There was a point when they were sitting still watching something and I thought that was a good idea.

I think for childless couples though it would be really difficult, especially as they are being watched and filmed - almost impossible to be natural in this situation, so maybe they are better without the TV cameras, though no doubt there would have been hours and hours of filming, and the result was what we saw last night.

I started a "Teenage Placement Scheme" in the mid 80s when I was working as a LA social worker and I recruited around twelve couples and 2 single parents in the first round. My colleague and I ran a prep course for one evening a week for 8 weeks and we were not apologetic about making sure we covered all sorts of behaviours that they might encounter. These young people between 13 and 17 were all in Children's Homes and I was convinced that they would be better cared for in normal family environments.

The kids in the Children's Home knew about the scheme and were full of questions and as they were old enough to understand we kept them fully informed. We asked participants to do a scrap book about their family and interests etc. and the kids were very interested. It was very successful and almost all the applicants were approved and we were able to place teenagers with them.

During the 2nd recruitment campaign we went a stage further and invited some of the kids along to meet the applicants and we were apprehensive about this but it was very successful. We split the applicants into small groups and the kids sat with them (only ones who wanted to be involved came along of course) We told the applicants that it was their responsibility to try to make it a positive experience for the kids. It wasn't that difficult as most of them had children of their own, or grown up kids. The kids enjoyed it and started picking out their own carers!

I think it's already been said, but there are of course hundreds of children like Daniel and Connor and Scott who are highly unlikely to be adopted. Sadly the possibility of them finding the next best thing, a permanent foster family is extremely remote, and what will happen is that they will move through a number of "short term placements" and will of course become more and more confused and troubled as a result.

As someone has said the boys have suffered traumatic pasts and so it is highly likely that in adolescence they will exhibit a range of difficult behaviour, and this is likely to be the case if they stay with the same family. Having said that we found that the placement of teenagers who had been through foster homes and children's homes was by and large very successful. I think the reason for this was because we broke away from some of the usual qualities we look for in foster carers for younger children. We recruited people who had committed offences when they were younger, had refused to go to school, were "streetwise" - living on the estates near to the Children's Homes and understood the reasons these kids were often challenging and troublesome. They were no "pushovers" though and laid down clear house rules and surprisingly the majority of the kids stuck to them. We were able to close 2 children's homes and the Scheme was adopted across the County.

Lilka I usually agree with all you say but I have to disagree that some children are better cared for in children's homes and "residential therapeutic settings." When I first started social work in the late 70s it was commonplace for very young children to be placed in children's homes but thankfully this changed over time and it became the norm to place all children 10 and over in foster homes. I am totally opposed to any kind of residential care because the children have to get used to a significant number of care workers (sometimes 10 or 12 working on a shift system) and all have different ways of caring. ALL of the children are troubled and troublesome so they have nothing to "give" to each other. There is always a drama of some sort in Children's Homes for older kids - they very often "abscond" in groups as it brings a bit of excitement. Social workers would often say that X wasn't "ready for a family" - but this is to suggest that X is ready to be cared for by 12 different care workers.........." That never made sense to me. Also the costs were extremely high as is the case with any sort of residential provision because of the overheads.

As for therapeutic residential establishments - ime this means unqualified carers being responsible for fewer numbers of children than in an ordinary children's homes. Nothing therapeutic about it. Sorry I am on a rant and at risk of detracting from the subject of the thread.

I agree, it was very sad to watch and I felt so much for those little boys. Although I think it is wonderful that so many children got placed as a result of an Adoption party, I did feel uneasy watching it.

NanaNina I do understand what you're saying, but I think there comes a point where a child might be so troubled and have such severe problems that they are no longer able to be living with a family - there's a limit to what we can expect a full time family (whether foster or adoptive) to live with. Extreme violence, sexually abusive behaviour, or many other very serious things, can break a family apart, and I don't think we can ask foster or adoptive parents to cope with this. For my part, I would never be seeking for my children to leave my home unless there was literally no way to manage them safely in my family any more. But I am realistic enough to know that there is a point where I (and most parents) cannot do any more. Whereas as tough as it is for the care workers, they are at least on shifts and don't have to live full time with the extreme behaviour.

Of course, what we should so is invest and give them all very good therapy etc...but in some situations I don't see a safe alternative to a more institutional environment

I watched this and as an exhausted mother of a 20 month old and a 16 week old (the latter of which isn't so keen on the night time sleeping) I welled up and said to DH that I wanted to give all three of them a home.

DD1 was born as the result of assisted conception and while we were on that journey, DH and I spent some time discussing whether or not adoption would be right for us. We decided it wouldn't for a number of reasons. So we're not the right people to give them a home.

Kew, I lurked through your adoption journey posts. You have my utmost respect, as do all of you adopters. As for foster carers, well as DH said, "How can they do that, they must fall in love with every one of them." It makes me feel better about the world that are people like you in it. You are marvellous and fabulous, whether you choose to believe it or not.

Pleasejustleave - I feel I must respond to your post and your comments about the assessment of prospective adopters. Applicants are asked about their marriage/partnership - as far as I know they are not routinely asked about their sex lives. The only thing I can think is they might have been asked if they were still TTC whilst applying to adopt as this could make a difference if they adopted a child and then soon after had a child of their own. Usually the issues around the r/ship are how the couple deal with conflict, is there a dominant partner, how do they share roles in the household - that sort of thing.

Of course we need to know about the background of applicants as this is one of the most important issues in the assessment. The way we are parented as children almost always affects the way we parent our own children and would parent adopted children. Some applicants did suffer abuse in their childhoods (very often from the father) but had a loving mother or granny who was able to show them the unconditional love that all children need to emotionally thrive. We don't have crystal balls - so we can only look at the past to help us to form a view of how the applicants might parent and adopted child.

There is a reason why previous partners are contacted, and it's not a matter of getting their permission. There was a case in Brighton & Hove some 5 years ago where a child was murdered by the male foster carer. The Serious Case Review found that the previous partner of this man would have been able to tell them of his violent disposition and how he had once grabbed a child around the neck and held him against a wall. The foster child who died was strangled. SO in the interests of learning lessons it became incorporated into assessments to interview previous partners. It isn't always possible as sometimes people just don't know where their previous partner is, but most do and they do have some reservations usually because they think it will be an opportunity for the previous partner to "slag off" the applicants. We do assure people that we are almost always able to tell if this is the case. (We pick up a few things about assessing people you know, not just what they say, but how they say it, what words they use, what they hesitate about, the looks that pass between them, and body language to name but a few)

Adopters are not compelled to send an annual report to the bio parents. They are usually asked if they are willing to send a photo and maybe a short letter to the birthparents on an annual basis, by a "letterbox" scheme, so that Social Services are the "go between" between receiving any letters/photos and passing them on to the birth parents. In any event once a child is adopted no-one can compel the parents to do anything.

I make no apology for making comprehensive assessments of prospective adopters (and foster carers) including getting referees reports, and I think if people object that is a very good reason to think that they do not understand or accept the need for such assessments, and would therefore be unsuitable as foster carers or adopters.

There have been posts about foster carers not being allowed to adopt and I honestly don't understand this at all, although it does depend on circumstances. The case I am thinking about is a short term carer (single woman without children who was an ex nurse and excellent with fostering children with disabilities) and we placed a 3 month baby with her, and the care plan was for adoption. The carer "fell in love" with the baby and wanted to adopt her. We didn't think this was right as there were dozens of approved adopters waiting for a placement of a child under 2 and the baby was ready to be moved at the age of 5 months so had only been with the carer for 2 months. Unfortunately the carer got very angry with us and moved to foster for an Independent Fostering Agency.

Sometimes it is not appropriate for a child to be adopted by foster carers because of the close proximity of the birth family, especially if they have been hostile to the placement with the foster carers.

Each case has to be judged individually of course dependent on circumstances, but I can assure posters that if a child is doing well in a foster home and there are no adopters coming forward, and the carers make an offer to adopt or long term foster, then very serious consideration would be given to this offer. Needless to say the most successful permanent placements are those where the child has been living successfully in the family for a significant period of time.

I was asked about our sex life.

And it sure felt like having to get permission from DH's ex wife, although I appreciate that's not what it was.

And by 'asked about our sex life' I don't mean whether we were TTC.

As a recent adopter, I want to say that Devora and Kewcumber are spot on. Don't judge until you have walked a mile in our (adopter's) shoes. I was haunted by the baby girl whom we turned down due to the uncertainty of her future needs due to foetal alcohol syndrome. I burst into tears when our SW told us she had been adopted by 2 dads. The guilt I carried was immense but I knew in our heart of hearts we just weren't able to care for her in the way she needed her parents to care for her.
We were invited to an adoption 'party' but didn't go as we were matched to a gorgeous little boy beforehand. It was the most bizarre but weirdest feeling falling in love with your child through a SW's report. Photos came after we had said we were interested.

We were asked about our sex life. Stuff like who instigates sex,how does one partner react if the other is too tired or not in the mood. How important is it. How did our infertility affect that side of things. I can't remember everything exactly but it was one of the more embarrassing parts of the home study!

An ex partner of mine who I hadn't seen or heard from in 15 years was written to to confirm that I didn't have any skeletons in the closet. That was the only part of the process I really thought was over the top. It was someone I had lived with for a year when I was 20.

Sorry me again! Yes Lilka I take your point. However I think if we know about the particular problems a child has e.g. sexualised behaviour, extreme violence, it is possible to find a foster carer who is willing to take the child. We had several children with sexualised behaviour who were fostered, but we had the services of a brilliant clinical psychologist who worked solely with foster and adoptive parents and she was worth her weight in gold. I think the most difficult child to place (and I only recall 1 or 2) who were victims of sexual abuse but had become perpetrators as is so often the case, and we couldn't place these young people (both boys) in foster homes, and they did have to be placed in residential accommodation.

One really upsetting case concerned a teenage girl who was placed as part of the Teenage Placement Scheme who had been sexually abused and of course the carers were well aware of this. The girl didn't display sexualised behaviour, but she was found indecently assaulting the 2 year old grandson of the foster carers. It was truly awful for the carers and the girl as she had been with them for over 2 years and was very much part of their family. Fortunately she was discovered before too much harm was done and the poor girl was mortified. To our absolute astonishment the carers kept her and made absolutely sure that she was never given the opportunity again to be left out of sight with any of their grandchildren. We were unsure how workable this was going to be, but the carers were adamant, and thankfully there were no more incidences and the girl lived with them until she was 18 and moved to independent living, but the family remained as a support to her - makes you feel humble doesn't it.

As for extremely violent behaviour, there were several young people at the Children's Homes in our area with outbursts of what could be called violent behaviour and one day a young lad pushed a care worker against the sink and threatened her with a broken milk bottle and she was terrified. I talked to one of the TPS families (both what could be termed "hardknocks" for want of a better expression) about this boy and told them exactly what had happened. I will never forget what the female carer said to me (and she stood about 5'2" and 8stone) "He won't have me against the sink with a fucking broken milk bottle" and I looked at her and thought NO he won't. I placed him with them and there was no violence of the sort seen in the children's home. I learned a lot from that Scheme, that out of control teenagers are a bit like dogs in that they know who is afraid of them, and it's nothing to do with size, it's to do with not being afraid. I can't say I ever felt like that - I could be intimidated by kids sometimes but tried not to show it.

Oh I really must shut up and give someone else a look in!!

Just for the record, I was never asked about my sex life!

More broadly, though, I often get asked if the process of adoption is horrendously intrusive. But I found it appropriately pitched for the task in hand - I think it is absolutely right that adopters are very thoroughly assessed, and wouldn't support any curtailment of that process (it may be that it could be done more quickly, but not less thoroughly).

But I am a lesbian mother in an interracial family and it wasn't easy to get either of my children - took over 10 years in all. I am more than used to people asking prying questions about my life and about my children. So I've got a very thick skin. A fertile heterosexual might feel differently.

NanaNina that is a remarkable thing the carers of the teenage girl did. Really, really admirable. It does make me feel humble.

My DH and I watched the programme. I dissolved when Connor was asked who he loved by Katy and he said 'I love you'. Like many people watching it was distressing to think no-one had chosen them, although to look at it another way, I was thinking about them as I went to bed and then realised that they would be safe in their foster home asleep surrounded by people who loved them. So while a future permanent home would be brilliant, at least they are safe and cared for for now. Katy and her partner were just amazing.

I do really hope the boys will be placed and that some news of that (not breaching their privacy obviously) can be released so that people who watched get to know this. Hopefully the same will happen for Scott via the programme. My DH and discussed putting ourselves forward - but our DS is younger than the boys and so I gather we would not be able to take them (that's why I was asking that question on the thread in adoption). It may be though that this is something we could do in a few years' time when our DS is older and therefore we'll be able to take boys from the tricky 5 upwards age group. Having had 1 boy I would love more.

You know, the aspect of these parties that I think is valuable is allowing prospective adopters to see how these children as real human beings rather than as problems on a page. Throughout the adoption process you are constantly fed facts about inherited learning disabilities, impact of fetal alcohol syndrome, rates of disruption etc. It's a grim old road, and very very scary - I remember thinking, 'What the hell am I doing, I've basically got no possibility of normal happy family life if I do this'.

The intangibles is the love and joy you get from children, and that's hard to envisage if you don't see it happening in the flesh. But you could still do this while removing the cattle market element. I think it would be great to have children's parties for adoptive families, and invite prospective adopters along to just see adoptive families in action, witness the love between us and our kids, and chat to the parents.

I just watched this, and had a couple of questions about foster carers, which some of the enormously knowledgeable people I recognise from the adoption forum might be able to help with...?

Are short-term foster carers and longterm ones completely different sets of people? Ie Katy and her partner would have signed up only for short placements with children who were (technically) on their way through to adoption or longterm care elsewhere? And your suitability would be assessed according to entirely different criteria if you were applying to offer longterm foster care?

Also, given how clearly emotionally involved Katy was with both boys, how does a foster carer keep from getting too attached to children h/she knows are only temporarily in her care? I was very moved by how physically affectionate she was with the boys, and given they'd been there two years by the end of filming, wouldn't you need to cultivate an almost unnatural self-control in order not to feel they were 'your' children...?

I watched it. I was in foster care from 7, ended up phasing out. In total,
I had four foster parents who were long term, plus the emergency foster carer. I think adoption parties can be good, if properly handled. I think Katie is lovely and I hope that someone out there will adopt the little boys.

Someone commenting on the programme somewhere (not on MN) asked why they didn't have parties only for sibling groups, so that people going to those would be those who were specifically up for taking more than one child on. I wonder if that would work or does it just make more sense to have a wider pool of potential families there to see if they make a connection with any of the kids?

I hope Connor and Daniel can stay with their foster parents, maybe with some extra support and help and breaks for a holiday.

The foster mum is younger than me and my dh and we have a dc under 10. They could have conceived them naturally at their age. Surely being loved is what counts really, not age or the 'ideal family'.

I hope they keep them and the boys 'get-over' the threat of being given to 'new parents'. It must be like the foster-carers are their mum and dad as far as they're concerned. Impossible to imagine how difficult that must be for them but at least they have each other.

In the States, foster parents are often given first refusal of their foster wards if they become available/"free" for adoption. It's a wise policy, as they know the children's needs and strengths.
I know foster parents who work and sacrifice for children who come to them in the clothes they stand up in, and broken hearts and spirits. I have nothing but admiration for those who open their homes and hearts to children in need.

The foster carers I know want to help as many children as possible and didn't go into foster care with a view to increasing the size of their family permanently.

One I know did go on to adopt one of the children she cared for and is currently hoping to apply for special guardianship so that a particularly hard to place 2 year old child she has cared for since birth can stay with her.

The problem for foster carers adopting their charges is that they have to stop fostering and that means the loss of their income.

A lot of people think foster caring and adoption are similar when in actual fact they are (I think) very different. I didn't become a foster carer to increase the size of my family, I do it as a job. I like to take in the often wild child and work with them so they become ready for adoption. Knowing this is my job also makes it easier to love them for a short time, then crucially be able to let go when it's time for them to leave. Yes it is very, very hard to say goodbye but seeing how much they are loved by their new families always helps.

And Angels raises a good point above - if I adopted the children with me instead of being a foster carer I'd have to stop being a foster carer and get another job to pay the bills.