Why Can't Adoption Be Reversed?

Again in the Daily Mail there is a story of a couple wrongly accused of abusing their baby. (Here is the last one I wrote about.) This time the baby was adopted while the case was still in progress. By the time the couple were cleared (the baby had rickets and possibly a blood disorder) the adoption was official and there is almost zero chance that they will get their child, now three years old, back.

You can read the story here.

Of course the child should never have been adopted while the case was still open. I wonder if the adoptive parents knew that the case was not finished? Shouldn't they have been warned before the adoption was finalized? Big mistakes were made but it's the attitude going forward that I don't understand.

The precident is that once the child has settled with its new family it would be too traumatic to uproot him/her again and return him/her to the birth parents. So the child is brought up by others because the authorities feel that this is best for the child.

They talk about attachment issues which can be very real and life changing. I'm sure some children might suffer long term attachment issues but why assume that this is probable for all children? Parents die and the children are brought up by other adults without attachment issues. During the war children were sent away for years and then returned afterwards. Many suffered from this but many got over it with no lasting effects. It does happen that young children change parents without attachment issues so why not consider some of the disadvantages of not returning the child to his parents?

Many adopted children (not all by any means) grow up with identity issues. Why not consider this? At the very least, most adopted children (not all) want to know the circumstances of their birth and adoption, and who their birth parents are. All these children are going to have to deal with the fact that they were removed from their birth parents for no good reason.

I feel desperately sorry for the adoptive parents as they are going to have to deal with the emotional fallout from this either sooner or later. Maybe it would be better for them if they dealt with it now while the boy is still only 3 years old. Let a wrong be put right, and allow everyone to heal. The alternative might be an angry 18 year old who doesn't want to forgive them.

I don't have the correct answer. There are no guarantees that either route will produce a happy ending, My concern is that there is a legal precident of never reversing an adoprion that rules out any real consideration for the people involved, including the child. How can a one-size-fits-all policy possibly be applied to children and parents in these cases? Where is the discussion about the possible benefits to the child of returning him to his parents?

It feels like they don't want to open a Pandora's box of what might happen if adoptions could be reversed under special circumstances. I don't for one minute think this is entirely about what is best for the child.

An Adoption Time Bomb?

I'm hard on the Daily Mail Online. It irritates me that they don't proofread properly, that half baked articles with no real information get passed for publication, that they write sensational half-truth headlines to get you to click (because a click is a hit for the advertising statistics), and stories that are not stories but just the disgruntled having a whinge in public.

And yet there are times when they use their massive readership and advertising revenue to good use. Times when they grab hold of a story and won't let go until justice is done. And times when they go over and beyond the call of a newspaper to try and help the wheels of justice but sadly can only go as far as the law will allow.

I concede that I'm willing to overlook the shoddy reporting and lack of proofreading on some articles for the flip side, when they intervene and get some customer service where it's due. When they publicize a major injustice and sudenly the company involved apologizes and pays out. When they expose corruption in high places. All this I appreciate.

Today I read the story of Nicky and Mark Webster whose three young children were taken away by social services and put up for adoption because the middle child had some bone fractures that could not be explained. They took the toddler to the hospital, did nothing wrong and everything right, there was no other evidence of anything amiss with their two other children aged 4 and 1. The children were taken and adopted even though the judge (in the secret court) said there was reasonable doubt and no abuse had been seen by anyone or proved. They rejected the plea that the children be adopted within the family.

Three years later they had to fight to keep their new baby and the DM stepped in to pay for first class lawyers and get some justice. They got some justice. "Some." The evidence showed that due to a milk allergy their GP had advised them to give their middle child soy milk instead of dairy. He had been suffering from scurvy as a result of vitamin C and calcium deficiency. There was no abuse, They had followed instructions and loved their kids is all.

Nicky and Mark won the right to keep the baby Brandon and they went on to have another daughter, Both children are well looked after and loved. However the judge said that as the three older children had been with their adoptive family(s) for three years it would be too disruptive for them to be returned to their real parents.

I think the judge was wrong. Three years is a long time in the life of a child but for the girl who was wrenched from her mother's arms on her fifth birthday, she'd had more of her life in her real home. And three years is not a long time in a lifespan of 80 odd years. During the war there were many children who were sent away for three years and then returned.

Howver, it's what has happened since that makes me think those adoptive parents are sitting on a time bomb. One that is due to go off in about three years when the daughter, who is now 15, turns 18. The real parents were supposed to get an update letter and photos every year but this stopped when they went to court over the new baby. The grandparents were supposed to get regular visits but this was stopped. The adoptive parents had to know the whole story. They had to know how the real parents were found to be good parents and had done nothing wrong. And yet they went along with stopping all contact. The children will know this in the future. I'd be surprised if the 15yo daughter has not seen the article in the DM or been told about it.

You cannot go against the courts but you can deprive your children of the truth. Of their truth. You can make a bad situation worse by continuing the suffering and the secrecy. A compromise could have been found whereby the real parents had visitation on some level and communication was kept intact. They chose not to and I think they might come to regret it in the very near future. There are no secure secrets in this age of instant worldwide media.

Me, I dissolve into tears every time I think of that 5yo screaming to her mummy, "Mummy why can't I come home with you? Is it because I was naughty?"

It's Not My Fault I'm Childless

I've just read an interesting article in the Daily Mail Online called: I'ts not my fault that I missed the chance to become a mother.  (Click on the link to read the article.) I wanted to leave a comment after the article but there were already nearly 200 comments and what I have to say, well, I want to say it publicly and I want it read.

The author of the article, Megan Lloyd Davies, laments that it was bad luck that she didn't meet the right person with whom to have a family. She isn't prepared to go it alone (as I did) and she won't freeze her eggs (even though at 40 it's a bit late to start considering this option) because she doesn't want to go through fertility treatment alone. She describes how she went through a period of grief and mourning for the children she would never have, starting at age 38. She labels her situation emotional infertility rather than biological infertility and states that it is just as bad. Eventually, she made some big changes in her life, has come to terms with the way things are and is making a good life for herself as an independent, single woman.

As you can imagine, I have a number of things to say about this. The bottom line, however, is that it is your fault. I applaud Davies for working through her grief and coming out the other end with a positive outlook. However, she hasn't quite missed the chance to become a mother but rather is choosing to focus on other things. Her choice.

Ruth and Naomi

I too held out for the traditional love, marriage and a few children, in that order. When I turned 40 and realised that it may not happen I did something about it. I suddenly woke up to the fact that many things do not happen unless you happen them. I could say that my single state at the age of 40, despite some very nice boyfriends and relationships along the way, was bad luck. But it wasn't. It was a result of my choices.

Like Davies, I also chose to hold on to relationships that were going nowhere because I was enjoying myself and hoping things would change - even though I knew deep down that they rarely do. When I started IVF treatment it was because I had managed to give up on the whole fairy-tale package and focus on what was most important to me - becoming a mother. I also wasn't oblivious to the friends who started out with the fairy-tale and tragically things went wrong.

Like Davies, I also chose not to do it alone while I felt I was financially insecure. I lived in rented accommodation throughout my 20s and 30s and I'm a teacher (nuff said). I was marginally better off by the time I reached 40 but it was still my choice to delay. It was only the shock of being 40 and childless that made me go ahead regardless. Whilst I no longer enjoy the life I once had vis a vis travel and entertainment (unlimited heat in the winter, a take out meal once in a while...), this is also part of the choice I made and I don't regret it at all.

I know many women in their 40s who are single and childless. I know married couples who were not able to have children. I also know many women in their 40s and couples who did not accept being childless. Most of them started out with IUI and IVF and if they were unsuccessful, upped the ante to donor sperm and/or eggs. I know those who have used a surrogate and those who have adopted. All these people could have been emotionally infertile (or as I used to call it circumstantially infertile) but they chose not to be.

I've said before that some of my friends considered going it alone and decided, for whatever reason, not to. That is a totally legitimate decision as long as we're all clear that it is a decision.

For me, becoming a mother was the most important thing, as I said, and I thank God that I realised this before it was too late. It wasn't an easy journey and I lost a few good friends over it on the way. I went through all my savings in the process and I didn't speak to my mother for almost half a year. Without going into details, I chose to leave behind any negative baggage in whatever form it appeared, and forge ahead with single determination. I was lucky to have the support of many good close friends but essentially I was on my own.

To Megan Lloyd Davies, I want to say that the period of mourning you experienced at 38 is probably largely biological as many women (even mothers) go through an intense broodiness as they approach the end of their reproductive years. It's there for a reason. By giving reasons why you would not follow any of the options open to you, you have made your decision very clear. I don't think any less of you for not having children any more than I wouldn't look down on women who decide not to marry or any other life choice. I'm happy for you that you have a fulfilling life and that you have such a great relationship with your nieces, nephews and godchildren. But all our lives are a result of the choices we made. It is your fault, sorry.

Disclaimer: I certainly don't want to offend anyone who has tried every possible route to parenthood and is still childless. There are people like this and I am not belittling your pain and loss. There are unfortunately, people with severe obstacles to parenthood.

Credits: All the illustrations on this page are taken from Google Images under childlessness.