Welcome to another week.
The government has today launched the National Adoption Strategy, an initiative designed to make adoption easier in England and Wales.
The new strategy will speed up adoptions, and could potentially relax rules around who can adopt. The initiative has received an estimated £49 million to put into recruiting along with implementing a new framework of national standards for adoption agencies.
The announcement follows growing calls from leading social workers and researchers to make adoption the last port of call for children in care, and to try to keep children and their natural parents together wherever possible. The Strategy also comes as natural parents have increasingly begun to challenge their children’s adoption orders in court.
Our question this week then, is this: do you think the strategy is a good idea or a bad idea?
Researching Reform 
I believe that the question has been answered in your writing above, which is excellent as always:) Also, haven’t a considerable number of adult adoptees recently reported that their adoptions were not the happy stories the government always attempts to sell, with some even attempting to revoke their adopted status?
LikeLiked by 2 people
A balanced argument does not result in high speed adoptions creating child security and wellbeing.
£49 million to feed the greedy people abusing the system !
LikeLiked by 1 person
I find this unbelievable, given all the evidence that shows that adoptions should only be carried out as a last resort, and with consent except under the most extreme situations. And I say this as one who is grateful for being adopted!
LikeLiked by 2 people
Hi, sorry to be nosy. Just wondering, do you remember or did you seek out your natural parents?
LikeLike
I had no recollection of my birth parents as I was adopted at a few months old. But yes, I did seek out my birth family. My birth father had died a year to the day before I made contact with my mother. I had a good relationship with my mother and her sister but relations between my five siblings(!) broke down years ago now and I’ve no idea why.
I had a great childhood and was given every opportunity to excel but I’m not academic and just wanted to live on the land – which I still do. I was never rejected, or ever felt rejected. I know that I had many advantages as a child and young person, far more than my siblings enjoyed. So for me, being adopted was no problem. It was different for my birth mother, who I know was deeply affected and had tried to get me back. The reasons for my adoption was my parents extreme poverty, just after the war, and it was their decision.
Ironically I lost all contact with my only child through the family court system, so I’ve seen and felt both sides of the coin. I am happy to discuss my experiences, and help others if possible, I don’t regard anyone who asks as being ‘nosey’!
LikeLike
Well then i demand to know as both a member of the public, a mother and grandparent who cares deeply about all the disgusting practice i’ve both suffered and witnessed first hand go on over all these years since the late 90’s i’ve been involved for, to know-
The stats in relation to all the adoptions taken place already where the children have suffered or grown up into early adulthood to suffer wth mental health problems. This includes the ones who are suffering mental health for life and the poor souls who have taken their life, because there seems to be no thoughts or lost sleep for them.
Section 17 of the Children Act 1989 states that it is the general duty of every local authority to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need; and so far as it is consistent with that duty, to “promote the upbringing of such children by their families.”
Or has this changed now to-
Provision of services for children in need, their families and others.
17 (1)It shall be the general duty of every local authority (in addition to the other duties imposed on them by this Part)—
(a)to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need; and
(b)so far as is consistent with that duty, to “promote the upbringing of such children by their families,by providing a range and level of services appropriate to those children’s needs.” [THIS ONE HERE]
All the public have a right to know these answers and have done for a long time and if half of these parents also traumatised by forced ‘so called’ adoptions, just like the children are -were not restricted or/and gagged the public i’m sure would be outraged but it’s all kept hidden all the time or parents face going to prison.
I can see it getting the point all these parents will rise up and say no more, with all the outrageous, disgusting practice that’s been going on all these years as ‘human beings’ can only take so much.
Is there any consideration for the parents now and not just the child within their family unit going to be happening, because so far all i have seen is that the child gets taken and then the parent/s are left to it without no support, no nothing because their livelihood’s have been robbed from them just as the parent’s have been robbed from their loving, caring family’s who do not barely get any funds to support them if at all where the wrong childen get taken.
All of this happens based on Mystic Meg hearsay, often based on fabrications called lies. Oh how easy that makes it to take each and every child but it does not make it right. Where is the moral compass. Are we dealing with monsters.
….and now all of a sudden adoptions are going to be speeding up with no care with no stats kept of the children affected who are growing up/have grown up and suffered severe traumas because of these LA’s.
Seriously, what are they basing it on to justify speeding up adoptions even further with no stats concerning what happens to the child as they grow older. Beause Judge Munby stated there were none on Channel 4 Dispatches recently re this latter. The link is here-
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/torn-apart-family-courts-uncovered-dispatches
‘The new strategy will speed up adoptions, and could potentially relax rules around who can adopt.’
Extremely concerning indeed when too many families are been/have been totally failed already.
This greedy money making practice has gotten way out of hand and this needs going to the national papers to let families know that any Tom,Dick or Harry could be getting to adopt their child/ren now, more than ever.
If it does, please let them know i am disgusted and i am only one voice but there are many.
Just so irresponsible putting children in even more danger now like that.
Sad days are coming indeed 😦
Xxxx
LikeLiked by 3 people
Yeahhh…. Tasha The Great – I saw it all coming …
The equation people are partly missing and especially the like of the Media is the transfer of funding resources away from “Early Help Interventions” for Birth Family in distress towards the like of building of the National Identity Dislocationg service and funding it’s settling-in with the “Adoption Support Fund” .. Which is having dubious results ..
In fact the shine of the extra ASF money is a perverse incentive now to break up family life – “oh well they can be adopted (kids) ” …Let’s recruit the minorities too and never tell them about “ideneity-oppression” some of us Adoptees feel ..
If only they knew what some of us know about the pains of Adoption and lifelong suffering inside ..
https://adultadopteeadoptionannulment.blogspot.com/2021/07/16th-july-2021-on-adoptee-revocation.html
But then I am only one of the 95 Adoptees of this survey, 40% of whom, were child abused inside adoption ..
Blame some of this trend toward more-Adoption on the BBC who have openly collaborated with Adoption UK and the ambitious CEO Sue Armstrong Browne also an Adopter of two kids (not originally hers) who appears to be powering along to make a National Adoption Service ..
“Taking away kids from family is going to be Nationalised” .. That’s a line from a Dick Orwell novel 2024 … “Grave New World” .. Sorry I should have told you all I see the future .. xx
LikeLiked by 3 people
Personally my thoughts are that parents are very reluctant to ask for help or assistance when things are going wrong and they need help . Whilst I understand adoption is very much needed , perhaps the same level of funding should be given to implement a child being with their parents or birth families aswell.
I have seen rash decisions with very young people parents whom are barely adults and have had children removed , sometimes I wonder if this is the knee jerk to a more difficult problem we just don’t seem to have the tools resources to fix
LikeLike
You say you understand adoption is needed.
.
This is the horrible thinking that promotes this mess of industrial scale child abuse by adoption.
NEEDED covers a limited number of cases.
The damage done by this system grossly outweighs the benefits.
.
All adoptions should be stopped.
All children at risk should be dealt with by managing the situation.
Only the bad cases are a problem. Send a social worker to live with the family.
The social workers only get promoted for every successful family outcome.
But that is too hard compared to telling lies and stealing children.
If they are too dim witted and lazy to fix families, why are they being employed.
Now we have the half wits charity paid for by stealing children.
For heaven’s sake, waken up and stop the child abuse.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Anything that makes Adoption quicker and easier has to be bad. Adoption agencies and all those involved with removing children to feed this ghastly industry will be rubbing their hands if this ludicrous Govt strategy goes ahead.
LikeLiked by 2 people
For those who may not have seen it, there was a CH4 tv program on over the past week entitled – Torn apart: Family courts uncovered.
it was made by Dispatches and presented by Louise Tickle from the Transparency Project.
This is the link
https://www.channel4.com/programmes/torn-apart-family-courts-uncovered-dispatches
LikeLike
No doubt successful lobbying by the fostering and adoption agencies anxious to inrease their million£ profits has prompted the government to go for even more adoptions.All adoptions should be voluntary and opposition from either parent should stop it from happening
Forced adoption is built on a lie since the judge ordering it inevitably informs the distraught mum that she is no longer the child’s mother as that role has been given to a complete stranger .That statement is a black lie and a piece of unwarranted cruelty.The woman who was pregnant and subsequently gave birth to a baby is that baby’s mother and no stranger or sly piece of legislation can alter that fact.
Abolish forced adoption and abolish risk assessments by amateur prophets who think they can predict the future……….
LikeLiked by 3 people
Ian …
There was a drying up of Early Intervention Funds to stabilise Birth Family or birth mother crisis over years (2013 onwards) This was picked up in part on page 34 of Josh Mcalister’s report : “Case For Change” (2020) … The Social Care Children’s Team still with an open “Case For Change” consultation (till Aug 13th) are asking what we all think in terms of how do we create a service that coherently helps family life to be stabilised in the community
Julie Pepper wrote a great little paper (Civitas 2018) from her barrister’s experience and in it she shows how the Lord’s issued concerns over the “Early Intervention Fund” and it’s slow demise…
What becomes clear in that 2018 paper and “Case for Change” is the way under David Cameron and subsequently others, adoption was favoured.. One economic driver was cheapness . Since £34000 a year per child in Local Authority outsourced care is a large cost adoption is cheaper . To incentivise matter the Adoption Support Fund (ASF) was created on 2015 to “settle in children” more with a whole array of therapies (usually quite lightweight) and some of those stabilisation methods are failing.
It seems the ASF represents a transfer of funds away from ” Early Intervention” funded “early help” methods and a rush or push to adopt because the costs are high for “cared for kids” in other arena’s of LA funded care ..
I made an observation to the Social Care Team in my submission (only 5 pages) which was : why is there no “Birth Family Support Fund” ? After all there’s an Adoption Support Fund ..
We can guess the answers though can’t we? .. Economically adoption is being favoured by Vicky Ford MP who herself is an ex Social Worker.. While the machine of the charities like Adoption UK and CoramBAAF are lobbying away for increases inside the Adoption Industry and in fact the creation of a National Adoption Service ..You can see this inside the Adoption UK’s CEO’s Blog .. The hand rubbing is all there too
The whole thing is also populated by adopters or success-driven adoptees .. At the top of Adoption Uk is Sue Armstrong Browne herself an adopter of 2 kids. CoramBAAF have at Senior Policy and Research level an adoptee ..The CAFCASS Head is an Adopter of 3 . So I am bound to thnk there is a major pushy experiment going on here which is full of self-confirmation bias ..
As an adoptee on the bad end of it alongside others who were abused I am deeply concerned ..Dislocation of identity is serious when it mucks up your head for the rest of your life… For some of us it does. We were not babies at adoption ..
The bottom line for me in my submission to the Social Care Team was to say can we preserve birth family life better again with early help methods and a one-stop-shop of signposting them by designing up Family Aid Help Groups in LA’s .. With lay monitoring of them to whistleblow on problems ….
I hope some of us say the same type of thing because it needs support and bottom up too from wise people here … Kind Regards .
LikeLiked by 2 people