http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article6675966.ece
From The Times
July 10, 2009
Number of adopted children returned to care has doubled in five years
(comments 3)
Rosemary Bennett
The number of adopted children who have been returned to care homes
because their new parents cannot cope with them has doubled in the
past five years.
Data obtained under the Freedom of Information Act show that the
number has increased by a third in the past year alone as parents
struggle with often challenging children who have suffered years of
neglect or abuse in their natural families.
Going back into care after living with an adoptive family is a
traumatic experience for children, and for the adoptive parents who
have to accept their only chance of having a family has gone. It is
also a huge cost to an already over-stretched system with the children
likely to need expensive specialist care.
The increase in breakdowns comes despite a fall in the number of
children being adopted. Only 4,637 children were adopted in 2007, the
lowest number since 1999.
Experts say the figures show that many children are being left to
suffer at the hands of dysfunctional natural parents for too long
before being taken into care by social workers. By the time they are
adopted, many have severe emotional or behavioural problems.
Local authorities are not obliged to keep any data on adoption
breakdowns and the vast majority of those contacted by More4 News had
no figures or only partial records. However, according to the numbers
kept by 92 out of 450 local authorities in England, Scotland and
Wales, 57 children were returned to care in 2008-09 compared with 26
in 2004-05. If the pattern is repeated across the country, it means
more than 250 children were returned to the care system last year.
The Adoption Act of 2002 was supposed to speed up adoption so that
children do not have to languish in the care system for too long.
However, the bigger problem may be that they are allowed to stay with
their natural parents for too long before social workers remove them
from their home.
Lord Laming, Britain’s foremost expert on child protection,
highlighted this issue in the wake of the Baby P tragedy. He urged
social workers to be far more realistic about parents’ ability to turn
their lives around and to act more decisively when there are problems.
The figures are also a reflection of the changing face of adoption.
Before the 1970s, most adopted children were babies born to single
mothers, but today more than three quarters have been removed from
their homes because of abuse or neglect. The increase in alcohol and
drug abuse among parents is also a growing factor in care proceedings,
with parents often being given several chances to break their habit
before children are removed.
According to data provided to More4 News by the local authorities,
last year only four per cent of adopted children were babies, with the
majority aged between one and four. A quarter were aged between five
and nine.
Adoption UK, the charity which supports adoptive families, said not
enough was being done to help parents to care for a challenging child.
Jonathan Pearce, of Adoption UK, said: “The figures starkly illustrate
the difficulties and complexity of modern-day adoptions from care and
also highlight the lack of support for adoptive families in their
challenging task of being therapeutic parents for traumatised
children.”
The charity says the system is still too preoccupied with the intense
and lengthy approvals process for would-be adoptive parents, rather
than preparing them in advance and helping them afterwards.
---------------------
Case study
‘I had naively believed in love’
Initially, the adoption seemed to be going well. But Kate discovered
that Alex, whom she had adopted when the child was four, had an
attachment disorder and heard voices.
“She never left my side, ever,” Kate says. “She couldn’t watch
television, she couldn’t play, she didn’t want to play with other
children. There was nothing that she could do by herself.”
Alex’s behaviour deteriorated rapidly and she began to torture the
family cat. She tried to kill her rabbit. Social services had warned
Kate that her daughter’s background was “as bad as it gets”. Alex’s
natural mother was an alcoholic and a drug addict.
“I naively believed that with enough love and enough attention and
security we could make it all better for her,” Kate says. “But it
became a nightmare caring for a child who isn’t attached to you.”
kippa - 10 Jul 2009 14:50 GMT
Comment on above from John Hemming's blog
http://johnhemming.blogspot.com/2009/07/reactive-attachment-disorder.html
John Hemming's Web Log John's Reference Website
Friday, July 10, 2009
Reactive Attachment Disorder
One thing that concerns me is the failure to recognise that it is the
way that children are treated in care that gives rise to many of the
problems they face in later life.
The DCSF Select Committee saw the system in Denmark which is so very
different both in the way it treats families and is so much better in
terms of outcomes.
However, although it is obvious from this that whatever may happen to
children before the state gets involved the outcomes could be far
better, this is not generally recognised.
The increase in the number of failed adoptions recognised in the
attached artice in The Times and also on More 4 tonight is from an
increase in inappropriate adoption decisions as well as more reactive
attachment disorder from the treatment of babies in part by birth
parents and in part by the care system.
posted by john ¶ 8:16 AM
kippa - 10 Jul 2009 23:52 GMT
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/leading_article/article6676979.ece
From The Times
July 10, 2009
Looking after Children
(Comments 5)
It is bad news that the young are returning to the care system
The Plain English campaign’s recent complaints about the inappropriate
use of language in politics has missed the main target. There is no
more misleading euphemism in public policy than “looked-after
children”, the new term for what used to known as children in care.
The care system in Britain is expensive and ineffective. Around 60 per
cent of children in care leave school with no qualifications. They are
50 times more likely to end up in prison than their peers. Neither is
there any real relationship between performance and spending. Local
authorities now spend £40,000 a year for every child in care. Yet
there has been almost no improvement in their educational achievement
in a decade. That is why it is especially discouraging news that the
number of adopted children who have been returned to the care system
after a failed attempt at adoption has doubled in the past five years.
British law enshrines the laudable principle that children should be
kept in their natural families. Under the Children’s Act 1989 local
authorities were specifically given the task of promoting “the
upbringing of children by their own families”. To uphold family life
is a laudable principle. But it is not the sovereign value and more
than three quarters of adopted children have been victims of abuse or
neglect, usually at the hands of parents with alcohol or drug
problems.
This presumption often means that children are kept in their birth
family for too long. Lord Laming has also pointed out that court fees
for applying to take children into care can be a deterrent, falling,
as they do, on councils. The Adoption Act 2002 was expressly designed
to expedite the adoption process but a 2006 government study found
that delays in entering the care system still significantly reduced
the chances of a viable adoption.
As a consequence, when children are finally placed in their adoptive
families, their problems have been simmering for too long. Then, the
support on offer for adoptive parents is inadequate. The Children
(Leaving Care) Act 2000 introduced personal advisers to help care
leavers to prepare for independent living. The formal system is not
working well enough.
The best solution is fostering. The average cost per child in care is
£774 per week. For children in residential homes the average is more
than £2,000. For foster care it is just £489. The system, however, is
10,000 people short. Worse, more than 90 per cent of foster carers are
over 40. Since 2007 there has been a national minimum for allowances
but this has by no means been implemented universally. Forty per cent
of foster carers receive no fees at all and 75 per cent are paid below
the national minimum wage.
The combination of an overloaded system, recalcitrant children and
inexperienced parents is not one that we should expect to work very
often. In a sense it is a surprise that these disappointing figures
are not worse than they are. The most important factor for a child in
care is a durable attachment to a trusted adult. When this is lacking,
as too often it is — one in ten children is moved nine or more times —
progress is all but impossible. Philip Larkin once said that an only
life can take so long to climb clear of its wrong beginnings, and may
never. We have a duty of care to these children and it is not being
exercised.