Whilst Britain continues to try, not terribly successfully, to modernise its child welfare system, we continue to look to countries like Australia, who are always ahead of the curve in this field.
Australian Stewardships Not Adoption Awareness Support Group (ASNAASG) is a project which hopes to revolutionise adoption so that it is truly child centered by moving away from the concept of permanency in care, to long term solutions and forms of stewardship which are truly tailored to each child. It is thought that the members of this Group are in the main adults who have experienced adoption as children themselves.
An explanatory piece on their Facebook Page describes in more detail how this new model for care regimes would work and why the old model, used by Britain and Australia, is not fit for purpose – and it makes for inspiring reading.
And below, is their proposal:
ALTERNATIVES TO ADOPTION: as a child protection measure
“We believe that in the best interest of the child, adoption should not be used as a child protection measure and that it should not be an avenue of supply for infertile couples and others looking to adopt. Instead of the proposed increases to adoption, a ‘child-first’ model should be developed that does not legally remove a child’s identity, heritage and bloodline, and does not legally sever the child from its brothers…, sisters, grandparents and extended family in the name of care.
We agree that some children can’t be raised with their parents for many reasons and that they might feel positive about the experiences they’ve had in the care of others – even in some cases building relationships with these people that are ongoing, strong and positive.
But severing ties and creating a false birth certificate isn’t a necessary part of that. It doesn’t logically follow that to protect and care for a child their identity must be changed or invented.
Basing care of a child on changing the child’s identity and denying a previous existence and origins (whether known or not) is not a sound basis for child protection and child development.
Definitely, there will always be a need to remove children from unfit parents. No contest. But changing the child’s birth certificate (adoption) is not about what the child needs at all.
“In adoption, child protection becomes disturbingly about those who ‘need’ a child”
We support a properly resourced child-first model:
* One that does not bounce the child around from foster home to foster home.
* One that does not separate siblings or discontinue support to the person when they turn 18 years of age.
* One that brings the child up in a safe, stable, long term home with a life-long support family.
* A model that does not try to influence a child to reject their own identity and history, but supports the child to be a part of it and its own family where appropriate set out by a court of law. and the guardian’s family .
* One that has comprehensive checks and balances – overseen and set out by a court of law.
We support the abolition of adoption (as if born to) as a child protection measure in favour of:
- Family Preservation (or reunification) first, or, if not possible,
2 A Kinship care model. Guardianship to relatives or close family friends should be the prefered out of home care option
- A child-first model as a last resort; stranger care and support in a long term, through to a lifetime, safe, secure, stable, support family under a Guardianship Order by the court.
Unlike adoption, this child-first model of care and protection treats the rights and care of the child as paramount.
What do you think? Does this model offer positive, progressive solutions to children who find themselves separated from their biological parents or could you add to this proposal?
A very big thank you to the National Child Protection Alliance for sharing this development with us.
Researching Reform 
Sadly this is an example of pious wishful thinking ………. Social workers and judges will simply claim that all three conditions are already fulfilled by the present system and will quote the Children Act 1989 to prove it !
Just bring in new laws to stop forced adoption of children from law abiding parents then ban gagging orders and restrictions on freedom of speech for both parents and children and you will have genuine reform that would transform the present disastrous situation .
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bravo! Finally, a recognition that adoption is all about the adoptive parents need and not what the child needs! Child protection should be just that, protecting a child whilst as a child and no more. There should be no legal jurisdiction over the childs identity when they become an adult, as there is if adopted.
LikeLiked by 1 person
https://adoptionjourneytalk.wordpress.com/2014/10/20/personality-profile-of-adoptees/
a study conducted over a five-year period working with 88 Adult Adoptees, in identifying belief ‘s that are commonly held.
we all shared similar beliefs, which included:
Children are programmed in the womb to respond to their parent’s voice, and have a natural bonding with their mother, prior to birth.
After nine months in the womb Adoptees are born to discover that this person is not there for them.
Being people pleasers
Being protective of Adoptive parents
Feeling abandoned
Feeling different
Feeling overprotective by adoptive parents
Not trusting in relationships
Using adoption as a crutch, i.e. blaming life’s problems on being adopted
Feeling the need for a sense of identity
Adoption is created through loss; without loss there is no adoption.
Adoptees and Adoptive parents have experienced at least one major loss before becoming involved in adoption.
Birthparents lose the child born to them, Adoptees lose their birth parents.
Society expects adoptive parents to be happy, and Adoptees to be grateful that they were adopted
. Birthparents are made to feel that they have to forget the event and the child they have given for adoption.
They are expected to get on with their lives.
They are not given permission to grieve their loss.
This leads to Adoptees frequently engaging in behaviour that is designed to retrieve their loss.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
Its a human right is have ones own identity not taking anothers but adoption means you take another. Conditioning of the child whilst young often means the child rebels when he/she begins to think for themselves. Probably why adoptions break down when the child is a teenager.
http://www.adoptionhealing.com/ginni/html
The great human experiment failed…..
So I have to ask, with all the decades of research into adoption and it’s negative consequenses, why does this government insist that kids from care should be adopted? Are they hell bent on destroying these kids lives?
LikeLike
and the “access” system is a big joke.
what chance do the birth parents have? none.
LikeLike
There are many flaws in this system. Denying the child access to and an ability to have a relationship with parents et al is wrong.
LikeLike
Infant Adoption. What they knew and didn’t tell us……..
http://www.adoptionhealing.com/what-they-knew-&-didn%27t-tell-us.html
LikeLiked by 1 person
As a young mother of a baby girl who was on a life machine out of the blue I received a call from the hospital the exact words were, “Can you come to the hospital we need to take your baby of the life support machine and let her DIE in your arms” she died and I have the memories and have lived in peace, but the many times in the past few years I have witnessed with many parents the last goodbye as the social call the adoptions and this is worse then losing a child in your arms to death and to witness an adoption is WORSE THEN THE DEATH OF A CHILD because there is no end only the memory of sitting in a tiny room for up to one hour holding a child who is loved then the child taken away to the unknown with not ever knowing if your child is safe or where the child lives, When kids are taken into care they not only lose their family but all of their personal possessions they become a nothing with a new name and although I agree in part with the alternative to adoptions or fostering NOTHING IN THIS GREAT BRITISH EMPIRE will stop the stealing and selling of the children until such time the money stops rolling in, thousands of kids every year have no stability just as the 2 brothers in Essex who were moved 144 time to different foster carers can you imagine the money made by the agencies 144 times and always when kids are moved around the agencies and the SS blame the child for being naughty, The only way forward is to open the courts and let truth be told instead of social workers with their hear say and stop the court experts with their lies and let the legal teams defend the families as apposed to many who work hand in glove with the LAs, and do remember every mother and father has to be represented by different legal teams, with another lawyer for the child, so 3 teams of legal teams in one child’s life, I have the evidence where a lawyer said to a family who had all of the evidence ALL EVIDENCE IS IRRELIVENT WE ARE IN FAMILY COURTS NOT CRIMANAL COURTS. it is also very important for children to be heard with their wishes and wants well that will never happen kids in care are in fear, because to tell who ever I want my family the kids are sent back to where ever until the bloody corrupt judges agree, then the judges pass the buck to the social services, judges will agree with kids then say I hope the SS will give the child its wishes and wants passing the buck, I have offered to pay for a free conference just for the judges so they can learn of their mistakes and of a corrupt system, all falls on deaf ears as many of them have shares in the agencies. The only way to help the children is for the Nation to march en-mass and perhaps it will stop the children screaming to be heard, they need the voices of the Nation.
LikeLike
I’m not sure why the hyperlinks are not working but if you Google http://www.adoptionhealing.com many articles on adoption come up on the website.
LikeLike
Natasha as can be read from this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adoption_in_ancient_Rome
with not many people aware that adoption goes back to the Roman times so if it has gone on since the Romans and has got worse due to the money now made then what chance has any kid in the 21st Century. But again in the Roman times it was money money money.
LikeLike
Unhappily it will instantly stop the supply of children for adoption and there will be no children to adopt, which is what this has always been about.
LikeLike
Isn’t it a good thing that adoption will be phased out and true care for the child will replace it or do you believe that it’s good to use children to help solve the problems of infertile couples ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
JUDICIAL COURT STATISTICS (page 25)
In 2011, there were 32,739 children involved in disposals of public law cases, including 31,515 orders made, 792 applications withdrawn, 350 orders of no order and 72 orders refused.
Only 72 care orders refused out of 32,739 cases !What chance do these poor parents have in our hopelessly prejudiced “family courts”?
Judicial and Court statistics 2011 – Gov.uk
Stats from BAAF:-
Placements 75% (52,050) of children looked after on 31st March 2015 were living with foster carers 9% (6,570) were living in secure units, children’s homes or hostels 5% (3,510) were placed with their parents 5% (3,320) were placed for adoption 3% (2,280) were with another placement in the community 3% (1,750) were placed in residential schools or other residential settings Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children 2,630 unaccompanied asylum seeking children were looked after on 31st March 2015 – See more at: http://www.childprotectionresource.org.uk/for-what-reasons-do-other-countries-allow-adoption-without-consent/#comment-62844
LikeLike
Forced adoption is bad!
Anyone who is any doubt should just let the following sink in. (Taken from the above statistics)
51% of children placed for adoption had siblings!!!!!!!!!
Who gives “them” the right to deliberately separate siblings? What sick mind thought that up? What sick minds allow it to continue unchallenged? Anyone involved in separating siblings need to book themselves in for therapy because it’s inhuman! It’s certainly not in “the child’s best interests” but purely for the convenience of others!
LikeLike
Oh dear. I’m shocked by this group and views. Think child first. Think open adoption. Think give a child a childhood. Family is about many things not just DNA.
LikeLike
Why Adoption ?
Why not a stewardship model did you even bother to read it before commenting ?
A stewardship model thinks children first.unlike adoption that thinks adults needs first.
It supports family contact and arbitrates for it unlike adoption that makes promises then renege on them .
It does not try to replace the childs family like adoption dose.
It does not change the child’s true Identity Like adoption does.
It does not cut all legal ties to the childs brothers sisters grandparents extended family heritage and bloodline like adoption dose.
It offers a life long warm and loving supportive family that does not try to graft the child onto genetic strangers family tree like adoption dose.
There’s more but I will leave it at that at this point I hope you get the picture
What is needed for children who need care is not a substitute family the child already has a family good or bad is not the point.
What the child in need of care needs is a warm ,loving supportive family that respects the child’s rights to its own identity and not have to sacrifice that in the name of care to satisfy the needs of infertile couples and to save Governments money that is not love it is pure selfishness by adults fulfilling their needs.
LikeLike
Hi Mazza, Unfortunately adoption is not as altruistic as one might think.
It initially meets the needs of the adoptive mother but not her expectations and (too) many adoptions break down. Since most adoptions are children from the care system they often return back there when they break down, more damaged by their adoptive experience. They are already traumatised from being taken from their mothers or the treatment they received by their parents or both. Those traumatised children are then given to strangers, mostly to women who have not had any experience of motherhood, let alone know how to deal with a traumatised child.
It’s known that children are made to feel they should feel grateful for being adopted but these children have suffered losses, given to parents, who in the main, are mourning the loss of not being able to have their own children. They are also part of a family and often have lost grandparents and other relations. Giving them a substitute doesn’t make up for that.
Open adoptions are said to be better for the child but not all adoptions are open. In fact very few are. Social workers and adoptive mothers feel the need to oust out the birth mothers for fear that the child will be unsettled if contact is maintained. That has been proved to be wrong, in fact the child is happier when there is contact with their own family. So isn’t that selfish to keep the birth family away? If a mother sends gifts on special occasions why should the child be denied them? It’s not a competition.
Adoption makes it easier for trafficking kids. Potential adopters do not have to undergo psychological assessments (but parents do!) and therefore kids could be given to psychopaths who abound with superficial charm but have devious intent. Why would anyone take the risk? 1,200,000 psychopaths are believed to live in Great Britain today and not all are locked up in prisons. High functioning psychopaths are in positions of power. How many are fosterers or adopters?
Forced adoption is likely to be in it’s death throes in any case. That’s probably why this government is now trying to offload as many kids as it can. Social media will be the death knell for forced adoptions. The use of social media is still in relative infancy compared to what it will be like in 5 + years time. It will be much harder to keep the kids from finding their families and vice versa. When older they will vote with their feet! What adoptive parent will want to take that risk?
The adoption model is failing on many other levels too. EU countries are appalled, not only at the frequency and quantity of children being removed from their families but then under 5s are separated from their siblings and/or adopted out of the care system. Children have become a commodity. Decisions made not just for their childhood but their adulthood too. This causes emotional conflict.
Social workers condemned Cameron for putting adoption first when they believe children are looked after just as well in foster care. Research into the mental health of children in foster care showed it was better for the children to have regular contact with their families. Adopted children when grown often have a high percentage of addictions and mental health issues.
Social media is informing the population of the realities of the care system. What was once hidden is now becoming known. Kids are more likely to be abused in care by those tasked to care for them, offer worse than the treatment by their parents. Saville opened the floodgates and now the government is desperatly trying to stem the flow of adults who have been abused as children coming forward to relay their experiences. Such is the power of social media. This government is trying to keep it all shored up, contained by all the different inquiries that are running simultaneously but never quite producing the results as they just run into another inquiry! No doubt they are waiting for the general public to get bored or distracted or irritated by the financial cost of investigating the (alleged) dead or dying abusers.
The birth families should be supported to look after their own children except in cases of serious abuse, which is dealt with in criminal court. Fosterers and adopters are assisted and supported with government funding but that funding should go back to families, the birth families. Adoption should never be about social cleansing. We are all different and at different stages in knowledge and experience.
We should be assessing the psychological makeup of anyone connected with putting children in care and those looking after them. Especially our policy makers, as one of the traits of a psychopath is a lack of empathy and judging by the policies they currently have, they have that in spades!
LikeLike
WHAT ABOUT ADOPTING WHOLE FAMILIES OR PARENT AND CHILDREN-TOGETHER ?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Adoption is about changing a child’s Identity and severing all legal ties to parents, siblings, extended family and heritage this can not be done with whole families but a care reseam could be established for a whole family .Adoption is not the answer
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: To change a child’s Identity is too great a price for a child to pay when it is in need of care. – Site Title
Pingback: To change a child’s Identity is too great a price for a child to pay when it is in need of care. – IDENTITY
Pingback: AN ALTERNATIVE TO ADOPTION – IDENTITY
Stewardship, family preservation, being allowed to retain one’s name, heritage and access to family? I cannot imagine having such a miracle!
As an adoptee who always wanted her real family, struggled through four solid years of search, and then suffered a failed reunion 2 years later – I cannot adequately express how much I support your goals stated in this article. Thank you so very much!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Alternatives to Adoption? – InterCountry Adoptee Voices (ICAV)