|
|
Post by lemonade on Mar 17, 2015 11:37:11 GMT
www.independent.co.uk/life-style/health-and-families/features/a-woman-who-handed-back-her-adopted-disabled-threeyearold-son-says-i-didnt-abandon-him-10111992.html?icn=puff-5Just read this article. What jumped out at me were the comments ... It was incredibly distressing and I could hardly work. Yet the social workers weren't able to provide any extra support and furthermore, the full report on Tom’s birth parents, which I was now shown for the first time, revealed things about their health that would have put me off ever adopting him.”
and Of those children whose adoption placements had broken down, 91 per cent had witnessed domestic violence and 34 per cent had been sexually abused before they were adopted. Mental-health problems were also prevalent in the children who had left home, with 97 per cent scoring in the clinical range of mental-health problems (compared with 10 per cent in the general population)
|
|
|
|
Post by lilyofthevalley on Mar 17, 2015 22:16:21 GMT
Yes, it's all so true. My adopted children had witnessed domestic violence. I've often thought that when my son, aged 15, menaced me with a cigarette lighter, he was mimicking the behaviour of his birth father who held a knife to his throat when he was four years old in the course of a marital row. They were both sexually abused too. And I remember the shock I felt when I realised I had been so lied to by the social workers and the realisation that the children were brain damaged. I can also empathise with the impossibility of nursing your child night and day without help and support and on your own. I experienced that for three years when my daughter was suffering from ME.
Lily
|
|
|
|
Post by corkwing on Mar 18, 2015 7:50:28 GMT
I hadn't realised that the care order former meant that they HAD to find a reason to blame us. That's presumably why Mackerel's care plan states on the front that he is undersection 20 because we emotionally abused him. That hurts - and it particularly hurts Kermit - every time we read it.
|
|
|
|
Post by mooster on Mar 18, 2015 8:16:57 GMT
What?  ? That is an absolute disgrace. Totally understand your hurt after everything you have done and continue to do for Mackerel. |
|
|
|
Post by damson on Mar 18, 2015 22:14:28 GMT
I had a look at the site. l couldn't find any discussion of section 20, only care orders.
Given the number of S20 parents (S25 in Scotland?) on this board, it seems odd.
No Care Order was needed when our DD went into foster care. And no- one called it adoption disruption/breakdown either.
Has anyone suggested our board is a good place for support?
|
|
|
|
Post by pluto on Mar 19, 2015 7:41:33 GMT
I pressume this woman wanted to cut every bond with the child including the rights children gain by adoption like inheritage. In the usa some of those kids are being adopted for a second time, there it is more commen to dissolve the adoption. But as you see if I understand it right it can be done in the uk as well if you. go back to court.
Something I not understand is why did this disabled child not move into residential care, I have no idea or she visits now but this whole cutting all ties business for a three year old I find odd. Not the fact that she did not want to care for him, maybe did not have the knowledge, that the child was severely disabled while she wanted a mainstream child.
There is a difference between people who have violent teens who move on to care and people who 'disrupt' early in the process.
The website caters also for birth parents and something vague about children who are disabled being taken into care by social services. (if I understand it right?).
Corkwing that is totally unbelievable, why do you accept it? For sure this can be changed even if you have to take legal steps? Maybe an insensitive question but if we adopters accept this sort of rubbish we are not going to change the system.
I pressume they have bullied you and told you he can not go back into care if you do not sign.
|
|
|
|
Post by pluto on Mar 19, 2015 8:02:08 GMT
It s interesting to read the website, this woman got the care order in a way that she was not blamed as abuser in any way, this was not without a fight.
There is a page about the steps being taken before disruption. Maybe I misunderstood and her disruption is no other than s20?
Maybe she has still contact with the child? What happens if a child is S20, do they still have the same rights as an adopted child?
She wanted not to be blamed incase she wants to adopt another child in the future what would be tricky if on your records it says you are an 'abuser' in one or other way.
|
|
|
|
Post by pluto on Mar 19, 2015 9:49:15 GMT
She did not stay in his life and the adoption is dissolved. I find this difficult to understand, you just never know what children understand and feel, especially the ones severely handicapped. I sse it this way, their soul is human and intact, there are outside challenges like autism, learning disabilities, physical disabilities what make that they can not function like 'normal' people.
And if you live with this sort of children sometimes you will see the healthy side, the undamaged side, the fact that they are as much human than everyone else.
My child came and screamed and had tantrums 24/7, (and nobody wanted him for very obvious genetic and behavioural reasons) you still can not have a normal conversation with him. He had a very bad time in foster care. When he threw out of the window all he had from fc I knew he understood more than allprofessionals together told me.
Yes epilepsie damages the brain, yes those kids are tricky to care for, but you become an expert as parent in epilepsie and it becomes less scary. Children can die from seizures, I know, but often they do not and live happy lives.
And there is support in the uk for people who care for disabled children at home, that is is tricky to do when you work is a question of making choices.
She mentioned institutionalised kids from eastern europe, I have one of those, increadable tricky to care for. but often it is more about the parent's expectations than the childs behaviours why it goes wrong. It takes years to change behaviours if ever, sometimes acception is all you can do.
Adopting poses a risk, you need to be commited and forget about your own dreams and desires. My child got 4 added diagnoses after adoption, I did not want those, I 'ordered' a 'mainstream' child. It just does not work like that, you walk the path and have to accept the hurdles. You have months to say no before the adoption order is through, that is the 'test', after that in my books the only option boarding, foster car, institutions but still having the family to support, to visit, to belong to. Disabled or not.
|
|
|
|
Post by corkwing on Mar 19, 2015 9:49:46 GMT
Corkwing that is totally unbelievable, why do you accept it? For sure this can be changed even if you have to take legal steps? Maybe an insensitive question but if we adopters accept this sort of rubbish we are not going to change the system. After 8 years of domestic abuse from our son and four months of fighting with social services, we were drained and had nothing left to give. We got no empathy from the person making the decision. She suggested we went on a parenting course. When I pointed out that we'd had about 200 hours of specialist parenting advice, conferences, etc. and I didn't really see what we'd get from a general parenting course, she closed the case as we weren't cooperating. We managed to argue her out of that. When someone came round and suggested we try sticker charts, we told them that we'd tried them and they didn't really work. Asked them what they expected to happen with them and they didn't really know. I thought they went away having recognised that sticker charts weren't the solution, but were later told that as we'd rejected that idea, they'd closed the case as we weren't cooperating. After something like that, frankly you take whatever lifeline you're offered, however foul and stinking it is. Some people will listen and understand. Others don't and won't. My perspective is that you have to accept that and work with it. There's no point going back to them again and again, trying to get them to listen. Einstein defined doing the same thing again and again and again and expecting something different to happen as madness, and I agree with him. Yes, we could approach a solicitor, but what sort of can of worms would that open? Is there any legal framework to get the decision changed? It could mean that we'd have to be reassessed and might lose and it could potentially cost us loads of money that we don't have. And it would sap our resources even more. I was talking to someone yesterday who's father needs social and health care due to his dementia and other health needs. He was saying that he's trying to care for this old man but finds he's putting the energy that he needs to do that into fighting with the system. Yes, I could fight the system to get one line changed, but I think I'm better off putting my time and energy into my family and my business. We've got enough of a fight on at present trying to get Mackerel into the right sort of school. Yes, I'd love the system to change, but I'm sorry: I'm not the person or in a position to wage a war to try to make it happen. |
|
|
|
Post by pluto on Mar 19, 2015 14:46:32 GMT
Corkwing you are right, it just makes me cross that the system does such unjustice to people who open their homes and lives to the most vunerable of society.
|
|
|
|
Post by lemonade on Mar 19, 2015 16:07:12 GMT
Children don't come to order, birth or otherwise... So agree. I can't help feeling she has somewhat missed the point of adoption. It almost sounds like a divorce 'things didn't work out the way we hoped'. It wasn't explained why she felt he would be better off without her around! How does she know this? "if I felt for one moment that he’d benefit from me remaining in his life, then I would do so in an instant" I wasn't quite sure what she was trying to say with the article, apart from he needed specialist help which she wasn't able to give and she hadn't abandoned him.  |
|
|
|
Post by esty (archive) on Mar 19, 2015 20:44:33 GMT
I viewed this very cynically especially as she replied to comments on her webpage with her professional photographer's name and they will probably be her photos on the site. I have a son similar to hers. Admittedly I knew he was very physically disabled and had severe learining difficulties before I had him however I didnt know that his 24 hr screaming would last 6 years before I managed to sort out his comfort and seating issues, neither did I expect him to be home for life needing suctioning and cpap. Am I arranging for him to go back into care? No completely the opposite - I'm fighting for his right to live at home with adequate carers, equipment and quality of life. Having worked with a son very like her son, operating about a 6 month level although 5 years old his ability to enjoy some things was very apparent and he recognised people by smell. I would fully support her view that with that level of epilepsy your life isnt your own and you are 'on duty' 24 hours a day however he was her son. Apparently he remains her son but she sounds as if she's choosing not to be involved in his life as he wouldnt get any benefit? I get that with the right info she'd never have looked at him, but with the right info many of us would not have said yes to the match with our children.
|
|
|
|
Post by larsti on Mar 21, 2015 21:26:02 GMT
I hadn't seen this thread until now but I am glad I did because I don't feel so bad about my thoughts (or rather questions) about this case. I too wondered why he hadn't gone into residential care while she remained his Mum, just like you would if a birth child could not be cared for at home.
We have a school for severely autistic children near us and they are at school 52 weeks a year.
Taking on that lifelong responsibility, especially as a single person, would be unimaginably hard but I suppose in the end she did make a choice and could have chosen differently (from the information we have available).
I think her campaign to secure 'no blame' disruptions is a good thing though. It does make sense now why the SW's blame the parents. The system stinks.
|
|
? That is an absolute disgrace. 
