JUST PHILOSOPHISING ON - SOCIAL WORK AND THE ADOPTION DILEMMA. PART 3.
'Arguably, s they are the child's legal parent, generally, adoptive parents and families should not have a higher legal and moral claim on local authorities' resources, than other families.
Where they might, however, have such a claim, is in the cases where the relevant local authority places misconceived and unrealistic expectations on them, pertaining to matters such as contact with birth families. .......'
If they have to look outside of the family and extended families, they will explore the option of a placement with suitable assessed carers within the family's social network
Because of the philosophy or principle which holds that, a child needs a safe, caring, secure and stable family and home environment within which to promote his/her health and welfare needs.
Local authorities have been giving priority to achieving permanency care plans for children as early as possible, once they are removed from their birth families.
Probably most non-birth family and non-foster carer adoptors are likely to fear their adopted child having contact with their birth family.
Which is probably not surprising, as many of them are likely to have resorted to adopting, because, at the time, at least, they were unable to have 'their own children.'
For these adoptive families, their adopted child continuing to or having contact with birth family members, is very likely to pose a threat to the stability of the adoption.
After all, nobody can really predict how a young child or a teenager struggling with establishing his/her autonomy and identity, is going to respond to meet their birth parents or members of their birth family.
What can be predicted, is that such contacts are nearly certain to set of seismic feeling within some or all children.
Feelings which will raise questions for them, questions which will raise feelings in the minds of their adoptors, and might lead to tensions and anxieties, which are then expressed in behaviours.
To be continued!
Comments