It’s taken a little while to pull together some thoughts regarding the recent BBC article on the adoption crisis which has forced many children back into care: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0kdv1x83gko
You can read Jane Griffith’s eloquent response on behalf of CAPA to this here: Jane’s response
This piece seems to solidify much of what we have spoken about over over two recent themes: adoption and motherhood. Whilst the focus of the article is very much on parents, and we should never minimise the impact on fathers (indeed we plan to have this as a focus soon!), it was Verity who was arrested after her son accused her of assault, it was Verity who felt suicide may be her only option for escape; and both parents were threatened with prosecution for abandonment. Overall, the piece is a frustrating demonstration of what adoption activists have been talking about for well over a decade. Why has so little changed?
The article is harrowing, and the journalism and efforts of the families to explore the complexity families are often having to juggle alone is done with sensitivity for everyone concerned. As Fiona Wells and PATCH frequently state, if the money is there to place children back into care, the money is there to support the families to prevent this from happening. Traumatised children and teenagers not only require, but deserve compassion and support, and by leaving this the sole responsibility of their adoptive parents means that trauma is prolonged and experienced vicariously.
In the article, Liam, a teenager who was returned to care reflects “I think if social services had sorted themselves out, and I think if we had sorted ourselves out, personally, we could have pushed through and maybe it would have been a different situation“. This is an important reflection by Liam, who recognises a family’s desire to improve their circumstances (“if we had sorted ourselves out“), but this cannot be done without services stepping in to provide the required support (“if social service had sorted themselves out“). Thus, this is not about blame, but about recognising the value of working together to support traumatised children and the parents who love them. If a 17 year old can understand that, why does the law find it so difficult?
John Stuart Mill (English philosopher) famously stated that a moral society can be judged by how it treats its most vulnerable. Reflecting on this idea in the context of the article, where traumatised children are left without intervention, and parents seeking support are threatened with police action… it’s a damning indictment of where we may and how far we have left to go.
HOLES IN THE WALL 