Foster Review - Appeal

quidsy

Many gay & hetero couples don't have sex so why not define yourself as such for the sake of this application. You are basically a lesbian couple without sex. it really is that simple.

whitewing

Do you have joint finances? That may be one way of showing a greater than usual stability to your relationship.

rach_k

Couldn't you just tell them that you are partners/life partners and let them classify you as lesbians or bisexual to satisfy their need to tick a box? Tick one of those boxes yourselves if you have to. I understand that you want to be considered partners and I understand how you describe your relationship but you are using the term partner in a way that very few other people ever would and that is the source of the confusion. Other people would probably just say they're best friends who will grow old together, living together.

I wouldn't mind being called a lesbian for that reason, but if you do object for whatever reason, perhaps consider how many people are in 'heterosexual' relationships but actually have no sexual interest in their partner! I don't see how it would be much different to that.

I do understand why it might be confusing to children too if you try to explain it all, but you could just say you're best friends who live together or you could say you're partners. Either way, I wouldn't go into the 'but we don't have sex', I doubt you'd ever need to. How many parents discuss their sex lives with their kids?

snowleopard61

Although like most others I found the relationship as described in the first post confusing (female partners but neither gay nor asexual?), as further explained by the OP I think it makes good sense, and obviously works well for them. I would have worried that they were overly negative about men, which might influence a child, but the OP insists they are not; otherwise it’s hard to see what there is to upset or confuse a child.

As a matter of interest, is there anything to stop them becoming civil partners even though their relationship isn’t sexual? I mean, surely no one actually quizzes you at the time of the ceremony any more than if you were marrying? (Though I suppose there might be questions asked about why they didn’t marry, now that same sex marriage is possible.) And would it help? The other problem is that their local authority now know their situation and have difficulties with it.

I'd be inclined to say, try to get yourself some good representation at appeal - even a lawyer if you can afford it.

cherrycake

One of my main concerns would be the potential for either woman to become involved in a relationship with another person and for them to want to change the current living arrangements. This could potentially cause disruption to the child in a number of ways. It could be argued that a married couple or the same sex equivalent would be less likely to have major changes in their relationship due to the commitment they have made to each other.

We also know that due to children's experiences prior to entering the care system they desperately need to be able to make sense of, and therefore feel safe with, the relationships between the people that care for them. They need to be able to make secure attachments to their caregivers. I think this relationship might well be confusing for a child. Would one of you be the main carer or is the idea that you both share the responsibilities equally?

It might be that what you could offer a child might well outweigh the potential issues involved but that is for a panel to decide.

Lone_Northern_Lass

I'm among those who'd be very interested to read cherrycake's explanation of her reasoning.

N.B. Fostering and adoption are different activities, but share some similarities, especially in respect of the approval processes in the UK. My post below talks about adoption approval processes at times, not because I think adoption is the same as fostering, but because I know more about the situation with adoption scenarios and think the similarities are strong enough for the point to carry across to fostering scenarios.

The other point I'd make is as follows - most people in the UK wishing to become either adopters or foster carers have a choice of organisations which they can approach to approve them. All Local Authorities (council 'social services') have to run some kind of adoption and fostering services, but there are also voluntary agencies which approve adopters and charities and private companies which approve foster carers, e.g. Barnardos, TACT, Action For Children, etc. I believe the only people in the UK who wouldn't have a choice of which organisation to approach are those living in areas which are geographically very remote (e.g. Scottish highlands or islands) - in those cases, it's possible that the Local Authority is the only organisation which approves people as foster carers - however, I'd think it's still worth googling 'home location' + 'become foster carer' to check if there are other options. Certainly if one lives in an English city, there are likely to be multiple organisations (Local Authorities, charities and private companies) which cover one's geographical area and approve people as foster carers.

All the agencies approving foster carers and adopters have to look at what is in children's best interests, but different organisations have different interpretations of situations. On the adoption website forums I read, when prospective adopters are having a hard time with one agency which they've approached to assess them (e.g. because they're a single prospective adopter not a couple, because they have a disability the social worker is getting jumpy about (even though the prospective adopter has thought carefully about the possible impacts on a child placed), because the social worker preceives their life to be 'unconventional' in some way (even something as commonplace as not having a car), etc, etc) the advice given is often that they should talk to another agency rather than getting embroiled in complaints procedures or legal battles. With both adoption and fostering, I think how easy or difficult it is to change agencies depends upon where exactly one is in the process. If one has been fully assessed, taken to approval panel and turned down by one agency, then it is much harder to switch. Even at an earlier stage in the process, the new agency will probably want to know what the old agency's concerns were and will want to assess the situation for themselves. And of course, it's vital to be honest when talking to a new agency about the fact one has been having difficulty getting approved by a different agency. However, I know there are cases where prospective adopters have been viewed very negatively by one agency, but have then been assessed and approved and gone on to adopt with another agency. So, simply from the point of view of getting the approval you want, talking to other fostering agencies about how they'd view your situation is probably an important option to think about. The other point in favour of doing this is that being approved as a foster carer is not like buying a kitchen or similar. With one-off transactions like retail purchases, if one goes into complaints and legal battles one might get the outcome one wants (replacement product, compensation, etc). Foster carers should be given ongoing supervision and support by the agency which approves them - it's an ongoing relationship between the foster carers and the agency which potentially will last many years. There's an argument that this will work much better all round with an agency which seems willing, from the start, to consider your positives as prospective foster carers and to try to understand your situation, rather than with an agency which you had to take to appeal, lodge complaints against, etc, etc.

Morglin

Actually, I find the negative attitude towards men of more concern than the sleeping arrangements.

I can understand why women, who have been abused, might feel this way, but children need to grow with a balanced view of both sexes.

There are many lovely men, and just as many evil women!

Lin

sams247

Morglin wrote: »

Actually, I find the negative attitude towards men of more concern than the sleeping arrangements.

I can understand why women, who have been abused, might feel this way, but children need to grow with a balanced view of both sexes.

There are many lovely men, and just as many evil women!

Lin

I did say we dont have a negative view of men. We dont. But we dont want to have sex with men. And we thought about that a lot before we chose to merge families and bring up our children together as we didnt want any disruption in their lives. The relationship and its stability was a huge consideration for our children in our view, and we decided it would work. We commited to being ope if we found we were attracted to anyone else. That has not happened in 14 years. It works well.

I dont hate men or women. I just choose not to have sex with another person again. Its my body and I've decided no more sharing it.

VJsmum

I don't understand the technicalities of fostering / adoption but single people foster - don't they?

Would it be possible for one of you to register - or am i being too simplistic?

Good on you, by the way, for wanting to offer a stable home to a child in need - and being prepared to fight for it.

Georgiegirl256

It's the word heterosexual that is causing confusion I think. The very definition of a heterosexual relationship is 'someone being sexually attracted to a member of the opposite sex/someone who is having a sexual orientation to a member of the opposite sex. Neither of these sum up your relationship at all in my opinion.

Many couples of all different sexual orientations don't have sex, and have perfectly loving and fulfilling relationships, and this appears to be how your relationship works.

From the outside looking in though, if I had to describe your relationship in someway, it would be that of a lesbian couple.