https://www.lawgazette.co.uk/analysis/no-time-to-waste-on-adoption-reform/64882.articleNo time to waste on adoption reform
By Catherine Baksi 26 March 2012
ntil the government announced its plans to speed up adoptions this month, I confess I knew very little about the process. When I looked into it, I was shocked both by how fragmented the system is and how long it takes. Statistics in the government’s new action plan show there are over 65,000 children in England and Wales who are looked after by local authorities. Last year 3,050 were adopted the lowest number since 2001. And so far this year only 60 babies have been adopted. Those who were adopted spent an average of 21 months in care beforehand. Meaning that a child who enters care at the age of two and a half will be nearly five by they time they move to be with their adoptive family. Time is so crucial for children. As the experts explain, babies’ brains develop rapidly in the first two years of life and it is crucial for their development that they form secure and stable attachments with one or two main carers during this time. Children who are insecurely attached have more difficulties regulating their emotions, and showing empathy for others and may also have difficulties forming attachments later in life. The government’s action plan cites research that suggests babies who are adopted before 12 months of age were as securely attached as their non-adopted peers, while those adopted after their first birthday showed less attachment security than non-adopted children. So, if circumstances mean that a child is not able to remain safely in their birth family, it is vital that they are adopted in a timely manner for the best chance of avoiding future difficulties. The government’s plans, spearheaded by education secretary Michael Gove himself adopted as a baby seek to speed up the process for children, overhaul the system for adoptive parents and strengthen local accountability for the timeliness of adoption services. The plan and proposed adoption bill require local authorities to find adoptive parents within three months or place children on the national register. Local authorities will be prevented from delaying adoptions while they search for parents who match a child’s ethnicity. Legislation will also make it easier for prospective adopters to foster a child while the court considers the case for adoption a practice known as concurrent planning. When I read about the last point, I was astonished that that was not already what happened, and by how separate the two systems for fostering and adoption are. From talking to solicitors it appears that the professionals involved in the two processes seem to work to keep them separate those working with fosterers do not want them to adopt children because it means they will lose a trained and trusted foster family, while those working with prospective adopters do not want foster parents to be able to adopt the children they have looked after, seeing it as jumping the queue ahead of non-fostering parents who want to adopt. Meanwhile there is a child in limbo who seems to be getting a bit lost and for who precious time is passing. The lawyers I spoke to told me that while concurrent planning was hugely positive for the children involved, it encountered a lot of resistance. This, they said, was for two reasons firstly because it is hard for prospective adopters, who face the difficulty of trying to bond with a child that may not remain with them, and secondly because birth families often felt that the outcome was predetermined and weighted against them. Without denying how emotionally tough either scenario must be to deal with, it has to be right that the risks are borne by the adults involved in the process rather than the children, and anything that can be done to create greater certainty for them, should be. The government’s pledge to put adoption reform as one of its key priorities has to be a hugely welcome, if somewhat belated move, if it remains focused and drives change quickly.
