When MP for Wirral South Alison McGovern, decided to try to get an apology from the British government for its forced adoption policies in the 1960s, she didn’t realise that what she was asking for would place the government in an impossible position.
At a debate she hosted on 12th July, McGovern asked the Children and Families Minister, Nadhim Zahawi, to offer a formal apology to women who had had their babies forcibly removed from them at birth, under a policy which considered single women to be unfit mothers. Zahawi never offered an apology, and didn’t confirm that he would take the request up to the Prime Minister to try to get a national apology on the practice, which other countries like Australia had already done.
Australia is often ahead of the curve and ahead of the UK when it comes to child protection. In 2013, the then Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard apologised to women nationwide for similar forced adoption practices which took place inside the country during the 1950s and 1960s. One year before Gillard made her speech, New South Wales Premier Barry O’Farrell, also publicly apologised over the policy of previous government in Australia to remove children from unmarried mothers. Two states inside the country had already apologised for the practices prior to O’Farrell’s own apology. That’s four official “I’m sorry” speeches from just one country.
So why does the UK refuse to apologise for forced adoption at all?
The answer lies in the UK’s continued use of forced adoption, or involuntary adoption as it is sometimes called today. During the debate in the House of Commons last month, whilst McGovern was trying to focus the government’s mind on an apology, it was Zahawi’s bizarre and factually incorrect speech which caught the public’s attention. Unsolicited, the Children and Families Minister went off on a tangent, offering reasons why today’s forced adoption practices were legitimate, and different to previous government’s historic policies, all whilst side stepping the question of an apology.
Zahawi’s strained speech highlighted an uncomfortable truth: if he apologised for historic forced adoption policies, he would effectively be ceding ground, leaving him and the government vulnerable to inspection over its modern day policies around forced adoption. Someone must have explained to Zahawi that the adoption sector, which is underpinned by forced adoption today, would fall apart overnight if he were to apologise for anything remotely connected to its existence.
Researching Reform tried to reach out to Alison McGovern to explain the intimate connection between the two periods of forced adoption, but we never got a reply. Without this understanding, her efforts at obtaining an apology fell by the wayside, and an opportunity to open a real and meaningful debate, which would have benefitted a far larger number of women, and men, was lost.
As for Zahawi’s argument during the debate that 21st century forced adoption in the UK is different to past practice and perfectly legitimate, much like most of his speech, it stands on shaky ground. Modern day forced adoption practices target vulnerable families in the same way historic policies on forced adoption once did, and have led to groups like Legal Action For Women openly accusing the government of taking children away from able mothers. A growing body of social work professionals are also questioning the legality of forced adoption, concerned about the ethical and human rights violations the policy presents, as well as its impact on children.
Forced adoption has seen a worldwide decline, mostly because countries have become aware that consensual adoption is far better for families and children, doesn’t hinder child protection and removes many of the conflicts of interest involuntary adoption creates, which include pitting birth parents against adoptive parents from the outset.
It’s time we had a consultation on modern day forced adoption practices in the UK, and we will be asking for one.
Yes please, Natasha, don’t just ask though – insist! And I think fathers should be included in the argument, as often they are deeply affected too. And, in the long term, most of the children are affected adversely as well and many spend years trying to trace their natural family.
There is very good reason why forced adoption is on the decline throughout the ‘civilised’ world. It is intrinsically wrong, except in a very few instances. The push for it to be abolished here is growing, and will become an unstoppable force. RR should be at the forefront of this movement, at least I think so.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thanks Roger, just sent an email off to an MP…
LikeLiked by 2 people
And you’re absolutely right, Roger, I should have included men explicitly (which I did in my previous post about the debate). I’ve edited this one to include men too, so thank you.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Reblogged this on tummum's Blog.
LikeLike
So good to hear this debate and hard questions are being put forward to the child and family minister – the work and research you do is invaluable- I know of mothers fighting adoption and I find it hard enough children being in care
LikeLiked by 4 people
Thank you, Kate.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on | truthaholics and commented:
Adoption/foster care placements, like hospital beds, are a valuable communal resource which must strictly be allocated by objective clinical need. The policy of forcible child removal (fed by dishonest anti-social work reporting, rubber-stamped at Court) is intrinsically undemocratic hence a very expensive stain on society which itself needs abolishing immediately.
“The trust of the innocent is the liar’s most useful tool.” – Stephen King
LikeLiked by 3 people
Excellent work Natasha.
People power against such cold hearted desensitized individuals like Timpson and Gove will win over in the end. its inevitable. its right, because its Humanity at its best.
id like to see a TV program entitled – The lost children of the UK: Adoption under Scrutiny.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thank you, DM.
LikeLike
Reblogged this on World4Justice : NOW! Lobby Forum..
LikeLike
Such a small word – ‘sorry’ – but so difficult to say; at least in the world of officialdom; I was taught as a child that it takes courage to say it and by so doing, acknowledging you were wrong in the first place.
So we have to believe that those who find it so difficult to say ‘…sorry…’ must be lacking in – courage. Ah…timorous beasties these officials; Shakespeare was right: … conscience.makes cowards of us all..’
LikeLike
Pingback: Why The British Government Won’t Apologise For Forced Adoption « Musings of a Penpusher
“The state must declare the child to be the most precious treasure of the people. As long as the government is perceived as working for the benefit of the children, the people will happily endure almost any curtailment of liberty and almost any deprivation” – Nazi speech to justify Lebensborn and the kidnapping of children.
In the comments section of almost every article about the state kidnapping children you’ll see the same comments about how only one side of the story is told, and how social worker never take children unless they’ve been abused by the parents.
The HM back bench business committee’s child trafficking business was named “The child protection system” to make people believe it’s a good thing. If HM says sorry for what it’s doing now, the people will realise that the majority of children being passed around the paedophile rings are from the “child protection system” and that children really are being kidnapped for no reason at all other than to line the pockets of criminals and add fresh meat for the nonces.
LikeLike
As long as fostering and adoption agencies owned or directed by social workers( and sometimes even judges) make millions every year it will be very hard but not impossible to change the law on forced adoptions.Let deprived parents ensure that every cruel story sees the light of day and maybe reforms will come sooner than we think !
LikeLiked by 1 person
Pingback: Why The British Government Won’t Apologise For Forced Adoption | Researching Reform – seachranaidhe1
Adoption, the action or fact of legally taking another’s child & bringing it up as their own, or the fact of being adopted.
Slavery, the state or condition of being a slave; a civil relationship whereby one person has absolute power over another and controls his or her life, liberty and fortune.
the subjection of a person to another person, especially in being forced to work.
the condition of being subject to some influence or habit.
work done in harsh conditions for low pay.
Adoption. Slavery. I cannot separate the two after reading the awful adoption stories of those children adopted being treated as slaves by their new “forever parents” vetted by social workers.
When it was found that American Adopters harmed & killed Russian adopted children the Russian Government objected & stopped their children being adopted by Americans. In England such stories are hidden, covered up.
Slavery was abolished. It’s time forced adoptions are too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
The “Adoption Catwalks” are akin to slave markets too!
LikeLiked by 1 person
Yes. I saw they were back in the news. RR covered the phenomenon in 2016. Sad indictment that it still happens. https://researchingreform.net/2016/08/25/fashion-shows-where-kids-in-care-are-paraded-for-adoption-welcome-to-middle-america/
LikeLiked by 1 person
Let us not forget the adoption breakdowns, or disruptions that happen yearly. They were found to be on the increase by CYP now who published their findings on their website. Jan 2018. Unfortunately only 50 out of 134 councils supplied full data & 4 only partial data so probably just the tip of the iceberg. 678 kids being sent back to care within a year.! This is after all the assessments by social workers!
Were their birth families informed? Were relations resumed with their birth families? I doubt it as their relationships were legally severed. It matters not that the adoption failed and the child is back in care but this time without any family! Maybe someone can tell me what happens when an adoption fails.
LikeLike