JUST PHILOSOPHISING ON - SOCIAL WORK AND THE ADOPTION DILEMMA. THE END....

 

The local authority and/or other adoption agencies should also take care to avoid placing an unreasonable, and, probably critical burden on prospective and actual adoptors. 

Such as around who should have contact with their adopted child, the nature and frequency of the contact, and how it is managed. 

Where they have in fact placed an unreasonable burden on the adoptive family.  

Probably arguing that face-to-face contact is in the child's best interest, even though it places the security and stability of the adoption at risk.  

It is, of course, only fair that the local authority and/or adoption agencies should put their hands up, and accept their responsibility, in cases where those risks have materialised and adversely impact the lives of the adoptive child and family.

It will probably always be the case that, when parents and carers  harm or take their children's lives. Local authorities are going to be accused and condemned for 'not having done anything', or 'not having done enough to protect the child or children.' 

They will be the 'evil spirits' which is believed to be responsible.

But the fact is that, when it comes to protecting 'other people's children', it is sometimes, if not oftentimes, very difficult to do enough to achieve the best outcomes for each child. 

To safely and over an extended period of time enable and facilitate the best contact arrangements with birth family.  

Which is going to promote each child's identity development, but without placing avoidable pressure on and risk breaking down their alternative existing family. 

In the real world, as it were, those agencies and professionals who are tasked with making permanent arrangements for the care of child, for various reasons, are not dealing with absolutes and mathematical equations. 

They are weighting up, within the context of the applicable government guidelines and childcare and family laws, as best they can in most cases.  

The relevant information regarding each child and research data, and making what they believe to be, on balance, the best permanency plan for each child or sibling group. 

It is not about making the ideal plan, because such plans are rarely, if ever available for most, if any child.