Would you/ could you adopt?

Alikay

Dunroamin wrote: »

If you adopt older children you have to be prepared for the fact that they're likely to be damaged to some degree. That's why you have to undertake a period of training before you're approved as adoptive parents.

I've heard that often with adoption, you're "on your own" once the children have been placed, whereas with fostering there's more ongoing support and training. Without a doubt adoption is the cheaper option for the local authority, but maybe long-term fostering would be better for a lot of very damaged children, as the new parents could then access psychiatric help or other therapy for the child plus much-needed respite for themselves.

Pee

I would really like to foster at some point in the future if circumstances allowed.

I am just about giving up on trying to conceive and did consider adoption, but have decided it isn't for me. This is really because circumstances probably aren't right to have a child, financially and where we live at present. My OH is a bit older and so probably we wouldn't even be considered.

I have had quite a lot of experiences with people who have been adopted, two very close friends. One was given up for adoption by a young mother when he was a baby and he's very well adjusted and happy with his adoptive parents - he is now in his forties - but found it difficult feeling that he was different to them for a while. I think we all feel different from our parents, his alienation was very similiar, he agreed, to the alienation I felt from my parents. (I am not adopted, I just didn't see the world the same way they did.) One had a mother addicted to heroin and he was taken into care at nine months and adopted at 2 years and has various issues with honesty, AHAD and drugs (although not heroin) himself. He is a really likeable and charming person and very fond especially of his foster mother.

I also, through work, have spoken to a lot of people who have adopted children. I would say that from a fairly large sample it seems to me that 50% of the time this works well and 50% of the time, even with two children adopted into one family, this is what I would consider unsuccessful (the adult adopted children are no longer in contact with the adoptive parents). This obviously does happen with children who are not adopted - more than you would think, but statistically, from the people I have met it happens a lot more often with adopted children.

Others on here have pointed out that children who are available for adoption will often have had a difficult first few months or years which is why they need to be adopted.

I think there is a shortage of children, with the possible exception of children with disabilities, who need adopting and a surplus of people who would like to adopt.

I did know a lady who was blind who had two natural children who were not blind and so then chose to adopt a blind and deaf girl because she felt she could really help her.

barbarawright

Dunroamin wrote: »

If you adopt older children you have to be prepared for the fact that they're likely to be damaged to some degree. That's why you have to undertake a period of training before you're approved as adoptive parents.

This article was a real eye-opener to me.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/oct/31/adoption-why-system-ruining-lives

There was also a discussion on Radio 4 this lunchtime which seemed to confirm that adoption is by no means automatically the solution either for children or the childless

marleyboy

We would not adopt as it would not feel like our own family. We are now fortunate enough to have a child of our own, but had this not been the case would have considered it was a cruel fate that we could not have children.

Dunroamin

Alikay wrote: »

I've heard that often with adoption, you're "on your own" once the children have been placed, whereas with fostering there's more ongoing support and training. Without a doubt adoption is the cheaper option for the local authority, but maybe long-term fostering would be better for a lot of very damaged children, as the new parents could then access psychiatric help or other therapy for the child plus much-needed respite for themselves.

If only!

Our adoption placement turned into long term fostering and we had virtually no support at all, not even a social worker.

lowlitmemory

I would consider adopting, yes. I've wanted to for a long time, can't explain it really but it's something I would strongly like to do. My H supports me fully in this and feels similar. I am currently pregnant but once we've had the baby and things have settled down, my husband and I will start the adoption process if possible. We feel we could offer a child a good home.

We even bought our current flat purely because it had three bedrooms (as opposed to other ones in our budget with two bedrooms which needed less work) as we know we'll need the extra room if we are lucky enough to be able to adopt.

Alikay

Dunroamin wrote: »

If only!

Our adoption placement turned into long term fostering and we had virtually no support at all, not even a social worker.

Sadly, I'm not surprised. Once the SW's get the kids through the door, they run like hell!:(. My experience has been better, but I AM dealing with pre-court cases where there are more agencies actively involved.

lostinrates

Alikay wrote: »

I think it's a shame that some people are put off applying to adopt as they think the process is too difficult or intrusive. I has to be done to protect the children involved, and I think some of it is urban myth anyway - most social workers are ordinary people, not the ultra zealous PC brigade they're made out to be!

you do what we would love to do. We were told we were not desirable because we were 'too middle class' and would risk giving children unrealistic aspirations for their own future. we went away and thought about it and applied a second time, but then someother things happened (the kind of things parents have to cope with concurrently but non parents don't) and dh said he wanted to put the idea on hold.

We have also considered adoption a lot. We have several happy, well adjusted asopted friends,(and a normal number of depressed and poorly adjusted ones...just like any people with life or slightly unrealistic parenting or just how they are occur in any sort of group). However, my husband has several negative family and close family friend experiences of adopting so is ...wary, and we do find some of the things we have read....difficult.

I have long term illhealth and this makes us think That we would be unsuitable for either very different opportunity to be there for any child or children.

Alikay

lostinrates wrote: »

you do what we would love to do. We were told we were not desirable because we were 'too middle class' and would risk giving children unrealistic aspirations for their own future.

That's a shame. We worried about that too (white, married, 4 bed det house in leafy suburb, BMW on the drive etc etc) but didn't meet that prejudice.

TBH decent aspirations are what kids need - we've not yet fostered a child with working or married parents. They all think you just get money from the post office, and if you break something in the house "they" (whoever "they" are) will fix it :rotfl:

lostinrates

Alikay wrote: »

That's a shame. We worried about that too (white, married, 4 bed det house in leafy suburb, BMW on the drive etc etc) but didn't meet that prejudice.

TBH decent aspirations are what kids need - we've not yet fostered a child with working or married parents. They all think you just get money from the post office, and if you break something in the house "they" (whoever "they" are) will fix it :rotfl:

That's what we thought. that aspiration (rather than snob value) could be the drive for self motivation in a child's life. But it was a definite...nope on the basis I have given. It made me feel that a social service that wrote of children as 'worthless' and automatically devoid of opportunity were not going to be a service that we would feel provided that much reward to be working with and getting support from.

We have older friends who foster, but who recommended only taking babies, babies removed at birth. They said after years of frustration with fostering that babies were those who were least damaged, easiest and could be given the best chance if they got a long placement or were adopted afterwards.