The fact that this is likely a result of ignorance and fractured processes rather than malice, is little comfort however, for the adoptive parent. Having already endured an emotional rollercoaster that has lasted years, they reach a point where they adopt only to find they have no support.

An article in the Guardian raises some pertinent issues about this, particularly in the light of falling placements.

In the piece, John Simmonds, director for the British Association for Adoption and Fostering makes an excellent point regarding the lack of support (link here) particularly with troubled children, groups of siblings, disabled children and those who are older.

And this I think is the crux of the problem.

“There needs to be a recognition that, for any adopter, this is a challenging thing that people are taking on.”

Nothing prepares you for adoption. The local councils and social workers would have you believe that the highly invasive and traumatic Home Study is part of that preparation. It’s not: it’s all about satisfying their requirements. And that doesn’t help when you are dealing with kids who have come from situations of real despair.

“Currently, 72% of adopted children were neglected, abused or both by their birth families. Alan Burnell, director of adoption agency Family Futures, says many children they see are scared and need help to adjust. “Even though they’re in safe, new environments, they need help to rewire their brain so that they can accept the love and the care that they’re getting in adoptive families,” he says.”

The requirements of an adoptive parent are complex. Where natural parents are led through the process by an army of doctors, midwives, friends, support groups, ante-natal classes and more, adoptive parents get to read a few books.

As you’ll see in the piece, there are those who do support parents and do it in the most caring, non-intrusive way. However this shouldn’t be a mere option. The one who stands to lose at the end is the foster child taken back into care because the parents need help in dealing with this brand new challenge. Remember a new baby is challenge. Think about a new baby arriving with a whole lot of baggage to a family who, having been through the disappointment of not being able to have kids and the tough adoption process, now find they are unprepared. Adoption is an end-to-end process. Support for families should be integral to the process.

• The government appointed an adoption adviser – former Barnados CEO Martin Narey. 

• The government has published league tables of the number of children adopted in each council area and the time each adoption too. 

• There have also been interventions to the guidelines surrounding the adoption of black/mixed race children by white parents. In principle at least the government feels there should be no barriers to cross-ethnic adoption. 

• There are further measures in the pipeline including a leaner, less bureaucratic process to vet prospective parents. There is talk of the walls between fostering and adoption being broken down. 

• Adoption was in the last Queen’s speech and is firmly on the agenda. 

The problem is that these are really just gestures in a situation that requires dramatic action. The government has shied away from putting in place measures to reveal the real truth. This is why we want to see a government-led, enforcement authority to oversee the behaviours of Local Councils and make things more transparent. We know anecdotally that parents who’ve been approved to adopt a child currently in care cannot do so as their council does not have the resources to finalise the paperwork. Desperate parents are just as confused when their adoption case worker says that the new guidelines do not apply to their council. There are endless examples and while we’re not saying they could all be solved by a central authority, we know that such a body would make councils up their game.  We do however feel that the government is still fudging the issue of hard figures: there is no way of quantifying how many people have been denied the chance to adopt at all stages of the process. We don’t know the reasons for applications being refused. We note that despite announcements proclaiming change, the government has not yet even added a question in the Home Study asking if the prospective parents wish to adopt a child from a different race. This information is essential to understanding where the process is going wrong. The government’s way out is to name and shame councils and cut their budgets. Frankly it’s gutless and pathetic. It should be noted that before the rise in adoption rates, adoption was at its lowest level in ten years. As we say, it’s a long, long game. It’s an even longer one for the children who are waiting. Think about it:

• Most of the children awaiting adoption will never be placed into a family.
• From the age of eight onwards, 99% of children up for adoption will not be placed.

Let’s examine what the government has done: it has introduced ‘Special Guardianship’, giving parental responsibility to a guardian, who tends to be a family member or friend. This is supposed to allow certain steps such as the costly Home Study approval, to be skipped, immediately after the links from the birth parents have ceased to exist legally. It’s a good concept, however in practice it means that while the number of children in foster care has decreased that the number of adoptions has not correspondingly risen. Furthermore,

• Special Guardianship breakdowns are not recorded.
• Successful voluntary adoption agencies have been asked to take on some of the work of poorly performing councils temporarily, thus massaging the figures. 

The number of babies available for adoption appears to have decreased.  The government will say this is because less of them enter the system; however the fact that should not be overlooked is that the time to adopt has not decreased so any babies entering the care system are likely to be toddlers before they are adopted. If they are adopted. Finally we have the ‘defenestration’ of Tim Loughton, who had acted as Children Minister for two years and Shadow Children Minister for seven. Tim and I have had our arguments about how far he could go in the review of the system, however he’s shown more commitment than anyone in what is a very tough position. He championed social work and initiatied controversial reforms to speed up adoptions. And he genuinely tried to do so by involving all stakeholders from campaigning groups-  like ours-  to the children themselves to adoptive parents, prospective parents and social services. Why not let him carry on his work and build on his knowledge and passion? He was making some small, but very significant breakthroughs.

Now Edward Timpson will have to pick up and run with it. I hope he does try and run but I am fearful of the energy being lost, the time lost, and the young lives that are caught in between. Farewell Tim and thank you for caring. The issue is just as urgent, poignant and tragic. We need to run faster.

Given the amount of bandwidth and the media’s insatiable desire for more stories, it’s easy to generate noise. But does that translate into real and meaningful action?

It’s a little misleading to see the government issuing an Adoption Bill rather than what it has done so far which is pronounce ‘guidelines.’ The fact is the laws they are talking about already exists. In 2000 a White Paper  from the Labour party became the Adoption Children’s Act in 2002. A year ago, Tim Loughton issued new guidelines on interracial adoptions.

So what has been achieved so far? Nothing.

The reason is that the government is still standing outside the circle, continuing to pass blame on to local councils and social workers (not always unwarranted) while insisting on not taking actual responsibility. A year ago Tim Loughton told me he was confident this would happen; that we might have measures in place to create, enforce and monitor those Councils and Social Workers and make the guidelines stick.

Eleven months later the prime minister has had to intervene to impose stricter measures. Meanwhile, time has been wasted and let’s be clear here, we’re talking about lives that are not just on hold, but being ruined. The longer a child is in care the less likely he or she will find a stable, loving family home.

Adoption With Humanity continues to call for action and for the government to set up a National Adoption Authority to address the crisis the system is in at present. Not just for the children’s sake. But for all of us because the impact of unloved children is not just personal, it’s social.

The government has today announced some changes to the prospective adopter assessment process. Adoption With Humanity applauds this as a long overdue procedure they have been requesting for quite some time, and we are sure that this will have a positive impact on the problems in the adoption system.

However, the group feels the need to raise a note of caution. Simply reforming the forms and some of the structure of the home study is not enough. With the new forms will come a significant need for training current workers and those still in education. Moreover, there will need to be put in place some authoritative person or organisation to ensure the quality of that work and the subsequent usage of the forms, so that individual preferences and views are not allowed to override the government’s policy.

“You can’t just rejig the paperwork or the Home Study and say you’ve made changes,” said Francesca Polini. “I am pleased that the government is trying to do something about the dire state of the adoption process but really it’s just not enough.”

She reiterates her call for a National Adoption Authority to oversee the work currently done by social workers and local councils.

“There is no point saying things have to change but not putting the necessary mechanism in place. If we had a National Adoption Authority then those responsible for carrying out the work would be answerable to that authority and would be required to justify their working practices. Only then would the government’s changes actually mean anything and not be overridden by individual preferences.”

She points out that the government’s recent change in its stated policy regarding trans-racial adoption is not reflected in the current paperwork. Neither, she says, has the National Adoption Register. “Even if social workers wanted to, they would not be able to find prospective trans-racial adopters.” as the necessary data simply is not recorded.

Francesca believes that unless there is a statutory authority to reinforce the government’s wishes and to monitor the work done by those involved in adoption, then nothing will really change. This type of blocking of the government’s policies, deliberate or inadvertent, cannot be allowed to continue. Every effort must now be made to ensure that the new reforms are properly instituted and then monitored by some form of statutory regulation with the power to ensure that efficacy and quality is maintained … a National Adoption Authority perhaps?