Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Forgotten Mother

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 41
31
Articles / Adoptees 4 Times More Likely to Attempt Suicide
« on: January 13, 2024, 04:43:28 PM »
https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/810625?form=fpf#vp_2

Adoptees 4 Times More Likely to Attempt Suicide

Jenni Laidman

Adopted offspring were nearly 4 times more likely to attempt suicide than nonadopted offspring, according to a study published online September 9 in the Pediatrics.

The study included 692 adopted children and 540 nonadopted children, all residing in Minnesota. Fifty-six offspring in the study attempted suicide; 47 of those were adoptees.

The study's lead author cautioned, however, that the increased risk did not characterize adopted children as a whole. "The majority of adoptees are psychologically healthy," Margaret A. Keyes, PhD, told Medscape Medical News. Dr. Keyes is a research associate at the Department of Psychology, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis. "With elevated risk, we are talking about a very small number of people."

Dr. Keyes and colleagues conducted an initial interview of children and parents and then completed a second assessment roughly 3 years later (mean interval, 3.36 years; standard deviation [SD], 0.45 years) between 1998 and 2008. The appraisal included a comprehensive mental health assessment, a personality assessment, an assessment for the presence of childhood disruptive disorders such as oppositional defiant disorder, attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, major depressive disorder, and substance abuse disorders. Parents and children were asked separately whether the child had attempted suicide.
Among the 47 adoptees who attempted suicide between the first and second assessment, 16 were boys and 31 were girls; of the 9 nonadoptees who attempted suicide, 4 were boys and 5 were girls.

The odds ratio (OR) for reported suicides among adoptees compared with nonadoptees was 4.23, after adjusting for age and sex. When the odds were adjusted for factors associated with suicidal behavior, such as substance abuse, depression, disruptive behavior disorders, and disruption in family and school life, the OR remained significantly elevated, at 3.70.

Dr. Keyes said this research is in line with findings in earlier studies, including research in Sweden showing increased numbers of suicide attempts among adoptees. A 2002 Lancet study also found that intercountry adoptees were more likely than other Swedish-born children both to die from suicide (OR, 3.6) and to attempt suicide (OR, 3.6).

"They have documented this [increased risk] in very large national cohort studies," Dr. Keyes said. A US study published in Pediatrics in 2001 also found an increased suicide risk among adoptees. In that study, the researchers assessed 6577 adolescents, including 214 adoptees. Of those, 7.6% of adoptees attempted suicide compared with 3.1% of children living with their biological families.

The current study should stand as a warning to clinicians to take the concerns of adoptive parents seriously, Dr. Keyes said. "Adoptive parents are sometimes viewed as overreporters and quick to refer to helping agencies, social service agencies, or their family doctor. I think their concerns should be taken seriously and not necessarily viewed as overreporting or overanxiousness. They may be looking at a real phenomenon in their family."
The authors did not find that specific adoption factors, including age of adoption placement, ethnic minority status, intercountry adoption, and domestic placement, predicted suicide attempts. However, a variety of behavioral issues were more common among suicide attempters than nonattempters (aggregate risk, 1.9 SD), and those same behaviors were more common among adoptees than nonadoptees (aggregate risk, 0.31 SD).

Among the risks associated more consistently with adoptees were childhood disruptive disorders (mean difference [d], 0.40; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.27 - 0.53; P < .001), reports of family discord (d, 0.40 [95% CI, 0.22 - 0.58; P < .001] when reported by parents and d, 0.26 [95% CI, 0.12 - 0.39; P < .001] when reported by children), academic disengagement (d, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.08 - 0.27; P < .001). Adoptees also had greater levels of teacher-reported externalizing behavior (d, 0.28; 95% CI, 0.12 - 0.43; P < .001) and teacher-reported negative mood (d, 0.34; 95% CI, 0.20 - 0.48; P < .001).

The researchers note, however, that these differences were more pronounced when they compared those who attempted suicide and those who did not, regardless of adoptive/nonadoptive status. The authors reported a d of 1.05 (95% CI, 0.76 - 1.33) for childhood disruptive disorders between attempters and nonattempters and 1.05 (95% CI, 0.76 -1.34) for major depressive disorder (P < .001 for both), a d of 0.64 (95% CI, 0.36 - 0.91) for substance disorders (P < .001), a mean difference of 0.71 (95% CI, 0.43 - 0.99) for low control (P < .001), a d of 0.69 (95% CI, 0.41 - 0.97) for alienation (P < .001), and a d of 0.52 (95% CI, 0.23 - 0.81; P < .001) for low well being.

Parent-reported family discord was also greater for attempters than nonattempters (d, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.67 - 1.34; P < .001), as was child-reported family discord (d, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.61- 1.23; P < .001). Teacher ratings for externalizing behavior and negative mood were also higher for those who attempted suicide (d, 0.92 [95% CI, 0.57 - 1.27] for externalizing behavior; d, 0.71 [95% CI, 0.37 - 1.05] for negative mood; P < .001 for both).

The mean age for adopted children in the Minnesota study was 14.95 years (SD, 1.9 years); nonadoptees had a mean age of 14.89 years (SD, 1.9 years). All the adopted children had been placed in permanent homes before the age of 2 years (mean, 4.7 months; SD, 3.4 months), and 96% were placed before 1 year. Seventy-four percent of the adoptees were born outside the United States; 90% of the international adoptees were born in South Korea, and 60% of the international adoptees were girls.

Chuck Johnson, president of the National Council for Adoption, an Alexandria, Virginia?based advocacy organization, emphasized the good news from the study, saying that most adoptees are not at risk for suicide.
"It doesn't surprise me that children who've been adopted in great numbers have struggles, which, I guess, if you took to its natural consequences, would increase the suicide rate," he told Medscape Medical News. "But the thing that really comes out at me is it appears a vast majority of children are doing really well."

The authors and the commenter have disclosed no relevant financial relationships.

Pediatrics. Published online September 9, 2013. Abstract



32
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12948247/surrogate-mother-childhood-unhappy-banned.html

I was born via surrogate but from Day One there was no bond with my mother and my childhood was unhappy. That's why I believe so strongly that this cruel and immoral practice should be banned

By Olivia Maurel

Published: 02:53, 11 January 2024 | Updated: 07:29, 11 January 2024

Growing up, I couldn't understand why I was born in Louisville, Kentucky. There it was in black and white on my birth certificate, yet it didn't make any sense. My parents had never lived in Kentucky, we weren't American and had no family connections to the place whatsoever.  When I asked my mother, she told me she chose Kentucky because it was where her favourite film, Gone With The Wind, was set (it wasn't) and she always wanted her child to be born in such a romantic location. It's also why she called me Olivia after one of the film's stars, Olivia de Havilland.  At the time, I thought this was a beautiful story, like a fairy tale.  Many years later, however, I discovered my mother's fairy-tale fantasy concealed a devastating truth; I was born in Kentucky because an American surrogate gave birth to me there.  Mere seconds after I was born, I had been rapidly removed from the woman who had become pregnant with me using her own eggs and had carried me for nine months. Rather than being placed in my biological mother's arms to be nurtured and adored, I was handed over to a man and woman who had, put simply, paid an awful lot of money for me.  My birth 31 years ago may have concluded this particular financial transaction, but it was just the beginning of a trauma that I struggle to cope with to this day.  It seems barely a week goes by without a celebrity declaring the birth of a child born via surrogacy, be it Paris Hilton or Khloe Kardashian.  In the UK, the Law Commission has put forward a recommendation that would see parents who use surrogates get legal status from birth.  Currently the surrogate mother is the legal parent until the intended parents gain a parental order, which can take months. Yet while my heart truly goes out to any woman who longs to have a child, as someone who was the product of a surrogacy birth, I can never cheer these announcements.  My experiences have led me to conclude that surrogacy is nothing short of cruel an immoral act that can cause lifelong damage.  Becoming a parent myself entirely naturally, in my mid-20s has only crystallised my view. The sacred bond between mother and baby is, I feel, something that should never be tampered with.  When writing about the trauma adopted children are said to suffer after being taken from their birth mothers, some psychologists refer to this emotional and physical severance as 'the primal wound'.  I believe it's the same for children born via surrogacy: a profoundly painful experience that disrupts the innate connections between birthing mother and child.  Little wonder, perhaps, that I have such unhappy memories of my childhood. Even as a young child, I had a sense that something was 'off' in my family. My French parents were very wealthy, and we split our time between Palm Beach in Florida and the South of France, living in fabulous homes, with a full complement of nannies and staff.  My education was the best money could buy; we went on the sort of holidays most people could only dream of.  Materially, I wanted for nothing. But emotionally it was a different story.  Neither of my parents were affectionate 'huggy' types and a succession of nannies, an army of different women, looked after me much of the time.  Why, you might wonder, when my parents went to such lengths to have me, did I not feel showered with love?

I simply don't know. Mum was 49 when I was born; it could be her age made it harder for her or the lack of that precious biological connection between us. Whatever the cause, there was no bond from day one.  I was so needy as a young child, I would scream the place down if my parents left the house. It got so bad they had to take me and a nanny with them if they went out to have dinner with friends.  Things were no better at school, where I was so clingy I suffocated friends until they grew sick of me and dumped me.  The older I got, the more I realised how unusual and unlikely it was for someone of my mother's age to have a baby. And I couldn't get Louisville, Kentucky, out of my head. When I was 16, I did some online research and saw Gone With The Wind wasn't set in Kentucky it was set in Georgia.  But what did keep showing up in my online searches was that Louisville was a big centre for surrogacy. Instantly, something clicked.  When further research revealed surrogacy was illegal in France still the case today I put two and two together.  The realisation that I had been lied to all my life sent me spiralling out of control as I tried to blot out my feelings.  My dark worries were kept to myself; I never spoke to my parents about this. That would have necessitated a closeness that just didn't exist. Lonely and confused, I started on a journey of self-destruction.  I drank heavily, smoked marijuana and partied non-stop, anything to stop the thoughts that plagued me. Was my mother really my mother at all?

Who was I?

My parents no doubt thought I was a troubled teen who would just sort herself out eventually.  But my depression deepened to such an extent that, after leaving home, I made several suicide attempts, which my parents knew nothing about.  My behaviour became more reckless. Now aged 20 and living in France full-time, one night, after drinking to the point of annihilation, I was raped. Telling the police wasn't an option because I felt so ashamed and blamed myself.  Finally, I realised I needed to escape from this cycle of trauma. I sought out a therapist, and weaned myself off drink and drugs.  Shortly afterwards I met Matthias, the man who became my husband. He was my saviour and psychologist all in one. Without him, I don't think I would be here today.  We married when I was 24 and I soon became pregnant with my daughter Eleanor, now six. Having been raised by an older mother, I was certain I wanted to be a young mum.  While I had no proof I had been born via a surrogate when I fell pregnant, I felt it with every fibre of my being. I told everyone as much, including my husband and his loving family. My pregnancy progressed well. As my unborn daughter began to kick, it raised all sorts of feelings.  Even before I'd held her in my arms, I knew you could offer me millions and I'd never give her up.  There was an almost transcendent joy at the thought of this little one being so close to me in my womb. That feeling continued in my subsequent pregnancies: my sons Theodore and August are four and two respectively.  Perhaps understandably, I was highly focused on my own children's births being just right. I wanted home births for all (although I ended up having a hospital delivery with my daughter) and for them to be instantly placed on me for skin-to-skin bonding, just as Mother Nature intended.  It was my mother-in-law who helped me definitively find out the truth of my parentage. For my 30th birthday in 2022 she bought me a kit for one of those DNA ancestry sites.  Before taking it, I decided to tackle my father. One day, while driving to our holiday home in the mountains, I said: 'Dad, I know I was born via a surrogate. I know Mum didn't give birth to me and you need to tell me because I deserve the truth.'

He replied: 'I need to talk to your mother before I can tell you anything.'

It was enough for me; with this sentence, he had effectively confirmed my fears. I waited for him or Mum to come back to me with the full story, but they never did, and I didn't see the point in asking again.  I sent my DNA sample off and was very quickly matched with a first cousin living in America.  I messaged her and said I believed I had been born via surrogacy. Although it was an awkward thing to ask, did she know if anyone in her family had acted as a surrogate?

She replied straight away: 'I know someone.'

I felt my life change instantly: nerves, excitement and, yes, pain, overwhelmed me.  She put me in touch with my half-brother, who in turn put me in touch with my three half-sisters.  They were so loving and willing to answer my endless questions and, slowly, I learned the whole story.  Their mother was the surrogate who had given birth to me and was also my biological mother.  Most surrogates are what is called 'gestational carriers' they carry the baby and deliver it but are not biologically related. Incubators, in other words.  But my birth mother had used her own eggs and was artificially inseminated with my father's sperm.  Aged 38 when she had me, she already had five children with her husband. Her youngest child died in a tragic accident when he was two.  Shortly afterwards, she contacted the surrogacy agency. She was so obviously grieving I believe she should never have been accepted as a suitable candidate initially, she didn't even tell her husband about her plans.  But, in my view, as surrogacy involves vast sums of money, the wellbeing of birthing mothers is all too easily overlooked.  After a while, my American siblings told me my biological mother wanted to make contact.  We began to exchange messages. At first, I felt such anger. I wanted to ask her: 'Why did you keep five of your children and sell me? Why wasn't I good enough to keep?'

Instead, though, I asked her favourite colour. Purple. Same as me. She sent me pictures of herself pregnant with me and I felt suddenly connected. She looked just like me: the eyes, the hair, the jawline. That was my mother all right.  It was the first time I'd looked like a relative.  She told me that every year on my birthday she thought about me and said a prayer. I want to believe her, but am not sure I do. Those things are easy to say to a person desperate to hear them.  More than anything, I wanted to know about my birth.  I learned that my birthday was chosen for me the pregnancy had been induced so I arrived on December 10, a date that fitted in with my parents' travel plans. Even my arrival was contractual and unnatural.  My birth mother was asked if she wanted to hold me and says she told the midwife: 'No, I can't. Because if I do I know I'll never let her go.'

Instead, I was taken away by the nurse and she never saw me again.  After a few weeks, our messages petered out. I don't think we'll be in touch again.  Sadly, I believe she suffers with mental health issues and has disconnected relationships with all of her children.  That said, I have an ongoing relationship with my cousin, her mother (my aunt) and my half-siblings. They have become the family I always wanted and I hope one day we can all get together in the flesh.  At last, after decades of suspicion, I had absolute proof of what had happened to me.  Yet I didn't confront my parents. I felt as if I would be spitting in their faces somehow.  They paid a lot of money to have me commercial surrogacy can run into six-figure sums they had raised me and I still felt a loyalty towards them. I had hoped that knowing all would bring me closure. Instead, hearing the truth plunged me into a depression and I was forced again to seek psychological help.  The more I reeled from my discovery, the more I realised I had to use my experiences to help other people.  Last year, I posted a video on TikTok which led to me becoming involved with the campaign that calls for the universal abolition of surrogacy. I ended up telling my story at an international conference on surrogacy held at the parliament of the Czech Republic. My speech went viral.  I've been moved to tears by the messages I have had from women who tell me how deeply they regret their decisions to be surrogates and how they pine for the babies they gave up.  We can only protect women like them and the babies they have if we ban all forms of surrogacy, including so-called altruistic surrogacy, where the surrogate is not paid a fee for carrying a child, as is the case in Britain.  After much thought, I have concluded that altruistic surrogacy is a myth.  Even in countries such as the UK where commercial arrangements are banned, large sums are paid in the form of expenses.  The reality is a woman's body is still being rented and a baby is still going to be separated from its birth mother. In my view, it makes no difference if the surrogate is not the biological mother.  It's her womb that has nurtured the child. It's her voice the baby has heard day in, day out, as it grows within her. It's her scent that will soothe the child. It is her they feel bonded to.

And while I feel so deeply for those who cannot have children, the sad reality is we can't all have what we want in life.  From all my research, I cannot see there is a 'good' version of surrogacy. In countries where it is or has been legal, it has often gone wrong.  For example, Thailand banned surrogacy for international intended parents completely in 2015 after a high-profile case where an Australian couple hired a surrogate who gave birth to twins, a healthy girl and a boy with Down's Syndrome.  The couple took the girl home and left the impoverished mother to care for the boy.  This week I heard about one British agency that offers financial incentives to potential surrogates: Apple watches, theme park tickets, gourmet meal kits, even sex toys.  I knew the minute I started to speak out publicly I would become estranged from my parents.  Sadly, that's exactly what has happened. They see their grandchildren but we don't speak any more. In a way, it's a continuation of the awkwardness and distance that has always been there. That said, I love them and don't bear a grudge.  But I'm unable to stay silent while I still struggle with the traumatic legacy of surrogacy.

As told to Claudia Connell 

33
https://www.theguardian.com/society/2023/aug/11/the-children-who-say-they-were-wrongly-taken-for-adoption

?My mother spent her life trying to find me?: the children who say they were wrongly taken for adoption

For years, Bibi Hasenaar felt rejected because she was adopted aged four. Then she saw a photo that described her as missing ? and began to uncover an astonishing dark history
Rosie Swash and Thaslima Begum
Fri 11 Aug 2023 06.00 BST
Last modified on Fri 11 Aug 2023 12.39 BST

Bibi Hasenaar has had two lives. One began in November 1976, when she was about four, arriving in the Netherlands to meet her adoptive parents. ?I remember it vividly. There?s a photo of us at the airport with other children arriving from Bangladesh it was published in a Dutch paper.?

Her older brother Babu was there, too.  Her other life appears only in fragments. She remembers being in a children?s home with another older brother and having her food stolen by older children. ?It was not a nice place to be,?

Hasenaar says. Her only memory of their mother is her long black hair. But of the flight out of Bangladesh, she remembers every detail. At her kitchen table in the village of Muiderberg, 30 minutes? drive east of Amsterdam, sipping hot water and fresh ginger, the 51-year-old slowly recounts the long journey that changed her life.  The plane, which felt huge to Hasenaar, who was malnourished and small for her age, was empty save for the four or five children who were being escorted for adoption. Babu was holding a black and white picture of his new family, but, Hasenaar says: ?No one explained anything to me; I didn?t know what was happening.?

She remembers a constant feeling of shock, interrupted briefly by awe when the plane took off and she realised they were in the sky. The only adult she recognised was an English woman she had seen at the children?s home in Bangladesh, who was there to escort them to their new families. At one point, Hasenaar became hysterical. ?They tied me to the seat with a rope because I could not be calmed. I wasn?t allowed to go to my brother in the rows ahead; I just felt so alone.?

At Schiphol airport, things got worse. The children were taken to await the arrival of their adoptive parents. ?It was a big room, and I felt very cold,? Hasenaar says. ?They wouldn?t let me go to my brother.?

To her horror, she soon discovered why: Babu had been adopted by a different family. Hasenaar began to cry inconsolably.  Bibi Hasenaar has had two lives. One began in November 1976, when she was about four, arriving in the Netherlands to meet her adoptive parents. ?I remember it vividly. There?s a photo of us at the airport with other children arriving from Bangladesh it was published in a Dutch paper.?

Her older brother Babu was there, too.  Her other life appears only in fragments. She remembers being in a children?s home with another older brother and having her food stolen by older children. ?It was not a nice place to be,? Hasenaar says.

Her only memory of their mother is her long black hair. But of the flight out of Bangladesh, she remembers every detail. At her kitchen table in the village of Muiderberg, 30 minutes? drive east of Amsterdam, sipping hot water and fresh ginger, the 51-year-old slowly recounts the long journey that changed her life.  The plane, which felt huge to Hasenaar, who was malnourished and small for her age, was empty save for the four or five children who were being escorted for adoption. Babu was holding a black and white picture of his new family, but, Hasenaar says: ?No one explained anything to me; I didn?t know what was happening.?

She remembers a constant feeling of shock, interrupted briefly by awe when the plane took off and she realised they were in the sky. The only adult she recognised was an English woman she had seen at the children?s home in Bangladesh, who was there to escort them to their new families. At one point, Hasenaar became hysterical. ?They tied me to the seat with a rope because I could not be calmed. I wasn?t allowed to go to my brother in the rows ahead; I just felt so alone.?

At Schiphol airport, things got worse. The children were taken to await the arrival of their adoptive parents. ?It was a big room, and I felt very cold,? Hasenaar says. ?They wouldn?t let me go to my brother.?

To her horror, she soon discovered why: Babu had been adopted by a different family. Hasenaar began to cry inconsolably.  After three days with her new family, she was still in distress. ?My new parents got in contact with the adoption agency and said: ?It?s not possible for this girl to stay here she is so sad and just wants to be with her brother.??

The couple who had adopted Babu agreed to take her, too.  But Hasenaar says she felt unwanted, both by her second adoptive family, who had only asked for one child, and by her birth mother, who she believed had given her up. Life in the Dutch village was completely alien. ?I had to sleep when I wasn?t tired, eat when I wasn?t hungry,? she says.

While Babu who chose not to be interviewed for this article adapted, Hasenaar says she has always been headstrong. ?You can do what you want to me, but I don?t change my mind. So I think that was for my Dutch parents the most difficult part. Family life was awful.?

As a teenager, she strove for independence, taking on numerous part-time jobs. ?I was also a little bit crazy,? she laughs. ?I have done things that are not good for you to print.?

Even now, Hasenaar seems like a woman determined to enjoy life on her own terms. During a tour of the eccentric property she is renovating with Herman, her husband of 34 years, she says: ?It used to be a commune, for people who liked to live off-grid I would like to do that myself one day.?

The huge garden is dotted with chickens and colourful hanging ornaments; in a field behind her house, there are two camels. She shows off a huge scar on her thigh where one of them recently bit her.  Hasenaar left home at 17 to be with Herman, whom she married in 1991. ?He saved me,? she says, matter of factly. ?And his family were so nice to me; they just accepted me.?

She and Herman had children quickly, and Hasenaar was a mother of four by the time she was 26. Sometime in 1993 when she was in her early 20s, had two young children, and was working in a bar and studying part-time Hasenaar began receiving letters from a person in Bangladesh claiming to represent her birth mother. The letters claimed that she had never intended to give her children up for adoption. ?There was no internet then, no way of checking anything,? she says.

Several letters arrived bearing the notary stamp of a Dhaka-based lawyer, asking for money to help with the case. After posting back the equivalent of a few hundred pounds in cash, Hasenaar heard nothing.  She contacted Wereldkinderen (World Children), the charity that had facilitated her adoption in 1976 while operating under the name BIA. ?They told me that my mother was making it up because she was ashamed." 

Hasenaar suggested she go to Bangladesh to investigate. ?They told me it was dangerous to travel there, especially while pregnant, and that I would be seen by Muslims as an unbeliever. I was young and ignorant, and my adopted parents were always talking positively about the organisation, so I trusted them. I decided it would be unsafe to go.?

I looked at the old newspaper pictures and I said to myself: ?That?s my brother.? And then: ?That?s me!?

The letters stopped. With few options left, Hasenaar focused on raising her family. Then, in the summer of 2017, a friend sent her a link to a documentary. It was about children who had been adopted in the Netherlands, and a man who had discovered he had been taken from Bangladesh without his mother?s consent. ?He talked about missing children,? Hasenaar says. ?I immediately got goosebumps.?

An elderly woman appeared on screen, holding an old newspaper. Hasenaar could barely take in what she was seeing. ?There were at least four children described as ?missing persons? in that newspaper. I looked at the pictures and said to myself: ?That?s my brother.? And then: ?That?s me!? I couldn?t believe what I was seeing.?

She dug out her adoption papers, which she had never closely examined before. She realised her date of birth was wrong, and she was listed as having arrived alone. ?It felt so surreal,? she says. ?All of a sudden, everything changed. I always felt that there was nobody in the whole world who wanted to take care of me, or who was missing me. And I realised, looking at those pictures my mother, she really was trying to find me.?

Six months earlier, in January 2017, a man named Abdel Kader heard that a documentary crew, alongside a charity, was looking into the possible disappearance of children from Bangladesh?s Tongi region 40 years earlier. Kader knew he had to approach them with his own family?s story.  Tongi, situated on the outskirts of Dhaka, was once home to the Dattapara camp for refugees of the 1971 war. The brutal nine‑month conflict, during which East Pakistan broke away and became an independent state, was one of the bloodiest of the 20th century. It was the result of the Pakistani army?s violent response to Bengalis seeking self-rule, and saw mass rape, ethnic cleansing and airstrikes that razed entire villages to the ground.  By the time Bangladesh had won independence in December 1971, hundreds of thousands had been killed and millions more displaced. To resettle slum dwellers in the capital, three camps were set up; one of these was Dattapara. Conditions at the camp were deplorable, and in 1975 various NGOs including Oxfam, World Vision and the Salvation Army arrived to provide aid. In the years after the charities left, the camp grew into a slum, and a sense of despair still lingers today: a high school sits on the mass burial site of a genocide.  In the middle of the small bazaar of Tongi?s Ershad Nagar neighbourhood stands a set of tall iron gates bearing the letters ?TDH?. The building, now used to administer ad-hoc health services, such as Covid-19 vaccines, was once the site of a children?s relief programme run by Terre des Hommes Netherlands (TDHn), a European NGO. Local families claim that in the 1970s the programme was used as a cover to kidnap young children for adoption abroad. TDHn denies these allegations, saying it was not and has never been an adoption agency.  After becoming displaced during the war, Kader?s family arrived in Tongi ? and never left. They were incredibly poor. There was no chance of employment at the camp, and Kader?s mother, Samina Begum, a widow in her early 30s, had been left to care for three young children. Her situation was distressingly common, and like most of her neighbours, she survived on handouts from local charities, including TDHn, which distributed food and rations from a building inside the camp.  In autumn 1976, when Kader was 16, his mother was approached by men claiming to be TDHn foreign aid workers who told her they ran a children?s home within the camp where she could enrol her two youngest children, Bablu and Rahima, aged five and four. Wary, Begum turned them down, but then different men, some Bangladeshi but one described by Kader?s family as a white man, all claiming to work for TDHn, kept returning with promises. Other mothers had done the same thing, they told her. The children would be fed and educated, they said. The home could provide medical care. TDHn says the organisation did not run a children?s home and did not mandate staff to engage in adoption-related work.  Kader says that after being assured she could visit and that the children would be returned to her when they were older, Begum finally gave in.  The following week, she went to the building where she had dropped her children off, but the guards wouldn?t let her in. Though she was briefly allowed to see Bablu during one visit, the week after that they told her the children?s home was temporarily closed. In the third week, they said her children had been taken to another location. In a state of panic, Begum demanded to see Bablu and Rahima. In response, Kader said she was threatened with a gun and told never to come back. Begum would later learn that her children had been taken to the Netherlands for adoption and now went by their middle names, Babu and Bibi. She never saw them again.

My mother was a fighter. Trying to find ways to get her children back consumed her everyday life

Kader, 63, suffered a stroke in March 2023 that left him unable to move properly and struggling to breathe. But when describing what happened to his mother, fury enters his voice. ?Listen, my mother was a fighter. From that moment, trying to find ways to get her children back consumed her life.?

He remembers going with his mother to the police station so she could report what had happened to her children. ?She was literally thrown out,? Kader says angrily. ?We were poor. It was difficult to get our voices heard.?

Undaunted, she approached a lawyer for help, and asked a local journalist to place a picture of her missing children in a newspaper ? the one that was featured in the documentary Hasenaar saw.  Samina died in 2008. ?My mother was a strong woman, but fighting the system for so long took its toll on her,? Kader says.

Once energetic and joyful, she became withdrawn and fell into depression. ?She stopped talking and eating. There were days where I couldn?t even recognise her. In the process of losing my siblings, I felt I had lost my mother, too.  I was only 16 when they were taken. That day changed my life forever,? he says. ?My father died during the war, so my mother was all we had. I was a lot older than my siblings and it was often my job to look out for them, so when they were taken I felt partly responsible. There were three of us siblings, and then all of a sudden it was just me. I felt very alone,? he says.

Hasenaar and Kader had their first phone call in 2017. It was a conversation fractured by translation issues, but laden with emotion. Hasenaar wept as her brother told her their mother had died. A few weeks later, the siblings were reunited at the airport in Dhaka. ?I couldn?t believe my eyes when I first saw Abdel,? Hasenaar recalls. ?He looked exactly like my brother Babu. They even dressed and spoke in the same manner. When we reached the village where I am from, everyone came out to welcome me. They told me how much I looked like my mother, and that made me really happy.?

In finding out the truth about her mother and the circumstances of her adoption, Hasenaar has also unearthed details of a scandal, mired in the turmoil and poverty of Tongi, and decades-old allegations of an adoption ring. Samina Begum was one of dozens of mothers who made the allegations against TDHn. All claim they handed over their children believing it to be for temporary care, only to discover that they had vanished abroad to be adopted by strangers. The charity says it investigated the claims and found them to be ?wholly incorrect?, adding that many local people wrongly understood TDHn to be an adoption agency, which it was not. But Begum was seemingly undeterred and is described as having built a coalition of mothers to fight for the return of their children.  ?Samina was incredibly brave,? says Sayrun Nisa, another mother who lives nearby and also claims her child was taken. The group of mothers that Begum had convened protested outside TDHn offices. ?She knew how to make a lot of noise. She would tell us that we couldn?t just sit by and do nothing. That we had to fight to get our children back,? Nisa says.

The ?boarding school scam?, as it is often referred to, is well known to those who work in international child protection. It is a simple, brutal trick played on families in desperate circumstances. ?Generally, the scam works best in locations where poor parents commonly send children to a ?boarding school?, ?orphanage? or similar for food, shelter and education, often where the majority of children are there temporarily a kind of safety net for poor families,? says David M Smolin, an expert on illegal international adoption practices, who lives in Alabama.  Smolin cites examples in Nepal and Cambodia. ?Sometimes the parents know the child is going to a foreign country but understand it to be a kind of study-abroad opportunity, and expect that they will have continuing contact.?

He knows this because he and his wife decided to adopt two girls from India in 1998. As soon as the girls then adolescents despite being listed as aged nine and 11 by the adoption agency ? arrived, the couple realised from their agitated state that something was seriously wrong. ?About six weeks after their arrival in the US, my wife and I received information from another adoptive family suggesting that the mother had not consented and that the father was not as we had understood dead,? Smolin says.

They discovered that the children had been taken after their mother placed them in a children?s institution for what she believed was temporary care. But it took six years for the Smolins to establish the truth. ?The most shocking thing was that no one seemed to care that our adoptive daughters might have been, in effect, kidnapped,? he says. ?The agency did not seem to care, the governments did not seem to care, other adoptive parents did not seem to care, and the psychologist we consulted did not seem to care. It shocked us that you could have stolen children in your home and no one would think that was a problem.?

It was only with the help of the prominent Indian activist Gita Ramaswamy that the Smolins were able to find the girls? mother, who said that, when she discovered her children were gone and asked for them back, she was told that the orphanage had spent a lot of money on the care of the children, and named an impossible sum that would be required for her to get them back. Of course, this was not correct; but, again, without literacy, lawyers, a certain status in society, she was powerless.  ?What happened to us and our daughters profoundly changed our understanding not just of adoption, but the world,? Smolin says. ?We realised for the first time the depth of injustice in which some people count, and others simply do not. 

The couple helped the girls reunite with their mother, and Smolin has since dedicated much of his career to exposing enforced adoption.  Nigel Cantwell has worked on international adoption for more than 30 years. He identifies the ?boarding school scam? as one of a number of methods used to secure illegal adoptions. Others include falsely informing a mother their child is stillborn, obtaining consent by manipulation, falsifying documents, and straightforward abduction.  He says: ?From the 1950s to the early 1970s, international adoption was driven by a humanitarian response to the perceived problems of newly decolonised countries, and to war and disaster. But then this saviour ideology was rapidly reinforced and even overtaken by the realisation that intercountry adoption was a means of family formation.?

There was no effective legal framework in place for international adoption. ?It was the wild west,? says expert Nigel Cantwell

International adoptions from developing countries to the west began to rise in the 70s. ?The received wisdom is that there were fewer children to adopt nationally because of better access to contraception, and the diminishing stigmatisation of single mothers.?

There was no effective legal framework in place. ?It was the wild west,? he says. ?Undocumented children were being taken across borders, their identities completely wiped out. The process was increasingly tainted by deliberately illegal, demand‑led, nasty actions.?

Adoption from Bangladesh seems to have mirrored the pattern identified by Cantwell, moving from emergency response to a business model. One horrifying element of the 1971 conflict was the use of ethnic rape as a weapon of war against Bengali women, leaving thousands of forced pregnancies in its wake.  The government responded by introducing emergency legislation that permitted late-term abortions, and the Bangladesh Abandoned Children Order, which allowed foreigners to adopt the thousands of ?war babies? who had been left at orphanages around the country. In 1972, hundreds travelled to do just that, arriving in a chaotic country assembling itself from the ruins of war. Prospective parents would arrive at orphanages and pick their baby from a row of cots.  Within a few years, there were a number of charities formally organising the adoption of Bangladeshi children to foreign countries. Soon, older children were routinely available for foreign adoption, too. Adoptees were often transferred to the care of new parents with little more than a piece of paper confirming their name and orphan status. In other cases, charity workers were apparently open about making up the details of children in their care, to hurry along the bureaucratic process.  It?s hard to establish an accurate number of Bangladeshi adoptions abroad during the 1970s. Children were sent to countries including Canada, the US and the UK. Official figures show that between 1975 and 1979, 454 children were adopted in the Netherlands alone. Many, like Bibi Hasenaar, came from Tongi.  What went wrong with the Dutch adoptions during this period remains the source of major dispute between the former country director of TDHn, Moslem Ali Khan, who also worked for BIA, and the dozens of families who maintain their allegations that he and TDHn stole their children, claims that they both deny.  Several of the mothers still living in Tongi repeat these claims when interviewed for this article. One woman, now 80, says she was tricked into giving her son over to men claiming to work for TDHn, and has not seen him since. Another witness claims to have seen a truckload of children being driven away from Tongi in the summer of 1977 as parents chased the vehicle, crying. One mother claims that her newborn baby went missing weeks after she turned down men claiming to work for TDHn; that she returned from the bathroom to find the baby gone from its cot.  On a damp autumn morning in Norfolk, a wood stove burns in Dr Jack Preger?s cottage as he arranges a stack of paperwork on the kitchen table. It comprises copies of legal papers and handwritten statements that the 93-year-old has kept for nearly 50 years, despite several relocations abroad ? including a sudden deportation from Bangladesh in 1979.
Born in Manchester in 1930, Preger, a self-described ?nice Jewish boy?, was politically active at Oxford University, where he studied development economics, and contemplated becoming a rabbi before settling on farming and relocating to Wales. It was there, spreading manure at his hill farm, that Preger describes hearing a voice telling him to train as a doctor.

After completing his medical training in 1972, Preger heard a radio appeal for the newly independent Bangladesh, where millions of refugees needed urgent care. Again, he felt a calling, and responded, going on to establish a clinic in Dhaka.

In 1977, Preger was at work in his clinic when he heard a commotion outside. ?I remember very clearly. Two women were on the road, shouting and screaming and rolling in the dust.? ]He went out to speak to them. ?They told me they were from the Dattapara refugee camp. They said they had been offered help for their children in a children?s home in Dhaka, had been told they would be able to visit, and that when the conditions at Dattapara had improved, they could have the children back.?

Preger, who had experience working with TDHn as a doctor, says he first heard rumours of an adoption ring operated by TDHn employees in 1974, but had been ?absolutely overwhelmed? by victims of the famine and floods ravaging the country and was unable to look into it.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      On the day the two women appeared outside his clinic, he was with a volunteer nurse. ?She asked me: ?What are you going to do?

And I said: ?If I help them, I?ll be finished.? But I did help them.?                   

Preger soon had a list of the names of 25 mothers, which he collected alongside a signed statement that they had all been tricked by TDHn into giving up their children with promises that they would later be returned to them. About halfway down, Samina Begum?s name appears. A note alongside it reads ?Children sent abroad: one boy, one girl?.

Preger began to go public with what the mothers of Tongi had told him, first approaching TDHn itself and then the Bangladesh government. He says he contacted the Anti-Slavery Society (now Anti-Slavery International), based in the UK, but they could find no record of the complaint. He contacted the Dutch government and the British Foreign Office, and, in 1978, he got in touch with two prominent lawyers in Dhaka, husband and wife Nazmul and Sigma Huda, asking them to help him look into the claims of child trafficking.  Once Sigma Huda started digging, she, too, became convinced ?something sinister? was at play and began collecting evidence. She believes that the issue goes far beyond Preger?s list; based on the testimonies she took in 1978, Huda thinks this has happened to hundreds of families.  Now 77 and still working as a lawyer in Dhaka, Huda was recently widowed after Nazmul died in February. She claims to have met numerous obstacles when trying to gather evidence of the mothers? claims. ?I was prevented from accessing any of the children?s homes or from visiting Tongi,? she recalls. ?I was a young lawyer and it was my first time dealing with such a case. No one was willing to support me and I started to make a lot of enemies.? Huda says she filed a legal notice against TDHn but was forced to drop the case when she could not make progress with the mothers? claims. TDHn said it has not seen evidence from Huda to substantiate her claims.  ?It is still one of the biggest regrets of my career that I wasn?t able to help those mothers,? says Huda, who went on to become the UN?s special rapporteur on human trafficking. ?To think there are hundreds of adopted Bangladeshis out there, who have no idea that their birth mothers never voluntarily gave them up. What happened to those Bangladeshi children is the very definition of trafficking.?

Preger shows us affidavits from 1986, almost a decade after the children had gone, which indicate that many of the mothers were still fighting to get their children back. On every document, they claim one man as responsible for taking their children under false pretences:  Moslem Ali Khan.

Khan, also known as Manzur, was country director of TDHn in Bangladesh from 1975 to 1982, and denies all these claims. He was also working for BIA, which operated a children?s home in Dhaka called Netherlands Intercountry Child Welfare Organization (Nicwo) and oversaw adoptions to the Netherlands. According to TDHn, its building in Tongi was later used by Nicwo as a children?s home, which they believe contributed to the misconception that TDHn was involved in adoptions, despite the transfer of lease taking place after the original allegations arose.  Preger knew Khan well. According to Khan, now 76, this was because Preger had approached him for help with a children?s charity he was running and Khan declined as he had concerns about Preger?s work. According to Preger, Khan started a smear campaign against him after Preger went public with the allegations.  Nearly 50 years on, Khan and Preger maintain their claims against each other. Preger was deported from Bangladesh in 1979, when, as he describes it, he was presented with an extortionate visa fee he could not pay. He believes it was a final act to silence him.  Preger?s allegations were the subject of several investigations. In December 1979, the Bangladesh government produced a report based on interviews with those on Preger?s list, stating that the parents gave up their children voluntarily and that they knew ?very well that the children will never be given back to them? and were destined for international adoption.

The report states that the parents did not want their children back and that they were ?allured? to sign the statements by promises of cultivable land, cattle and other inducements, which Preger denies. The report concludes that Preger?s allegations were ?false and baseless? while absolving everyone of any wrongdoing.  The mothers we meet say they were never approached by any official as part of the investigation. ?This is the first time anyone has come to ask me about what happened,? says Aasia Begum, another of the mothers listed in the report. ?I have never been visited by any government official. I didn?t even know an investigation had taken place.?

TDHn also investigated Preger?s claims in April 1979 and concluded they were ?incorrect?. The mothers were not interviewed as part of their investigation.  In 1982, the Abandoned Children Order was repealed when a new nationalist government came to power after one of a series of military coups. The practice of allowing foreign families to adopt Bangladeshi children was banned, and Khan was even briefly imprisoned, though never charged, for his role in facilitating foreign adoptions. After his release, Khan stopped working as TDHn?s country director.  In a statement to the Guardian, Khan denied the allegations made against him in their entirety. He said he had worked for both BIA, overseeing the intercountry adoption of children, which was not illegal, and TDHn. There were, he said, many charitable organisations in Bangladesh at the relevant time dealing with such adoptions. He said his only involvement had been in signing papers on behalf of the adopted children for families in the Netherlands, and that the allegations directed at him personally were false and had been fabricated by an individual motivated by a personal vendetta. He pointed to the government inquiry in 1979, which found the allegations against him ?were false and baseless?, and recorded the families as saying they had not been coerced into giving up their children, but rather had done so voluntarily for ?financial, social or medical reasons?.

In the years that followed, further legal action was brought against Khan by families whose children had been adopted abroad, but he has never been convicted of any crime. Though Preger continued his attempts to get the mothers? claims taken seriously, the case eventually drifted from public view. Everything appeared to have gone quiet; families of the missing children began to accept they would never be reunited.  But then, 40 years later, something interesting happened. A combination of social networking sites and DNA testing reignited interest in the cases. By the late 2010s, adoptees in the Netherlands began finding they had relatives in Bangladesh, and that the stories their adopted parents had been told about them being abandoned or orphans were untrue. A number of them launched legal action.  Such was the scale of the complaints, the Dutch government held an inquiry and temporarily paused all international adoptions to the Netherlands after they found evidence of ?forgery of documents, child trafficking, fraud and corruption? across the system, from Bangladesh but also Brazil, Sri Lanka and Indonesia.  TDHn also conducted a fresh investigation in 2019, which concluded that it was impossible to determine exactly how each adoption was established at the time.  A spokesperson for TDHn told us: ?The allegations that local TDH Netherlands staff were involved in misleading parents to give up their children for adoption have never been substantiated.?

The spokesperson described Hasenaar?s account as ?terrible? and the wider allegations made to the Guardian by women in Tongi as ?heartbreaking?, but said ?these allegations confirm that local people incorrectly perceived TDH Netherlands to be an adoption organisation?.

As of 2019, TDHn has been working with and providing financial support to a charity that works to reunite adoptees with their relatives in Bangladesh.

For Bibi Hasenaar, the various investigations and inquiries are meaningless. She no longer has trust in official bodies or systems. In 2018, she filed a case against the Dutch government, TDHn and Wereldkinderen for their alleged involvement in her fraudulent adoption, but the initial judgment concluded that she had taken too long to bring her claim ? despite the fact that she had only discovered the truth the year before. However, after the government inquiry in 2021, the state dropped its claim that her case breached the statute of limitations. As a result, Hasenaar is appealing, and expects a decision this autumn.

Wereldkinderen, which BIA merged with in 1983, told the Guardian they were currently involved in ?judicial procedures? brought against them by Hasenaar and were unable to comment on this article until the final verdict of the court was handed down.

    I?m glad we got to see our brother in person for one last time

In April, after speaking to the Guardian, Hasenaar?s brother Abdel Kader died, just a few months after being reunited with his sister and their brother Babu in Dhaka. ?I?m glad we got to see him in person for one last time,? she says. ?I spent the last three hours of his life on a video call with him. He was in a coma, but I spoke to him anyway. I cried. It breaks my heart that we lost out on so much. He was the only connection we had to our birth family ? now that he?s gone, it feels that has been lost, too.

?Going on this search has opened up many wounds,? Hasenaar says now. ?It has been painful for both me and my family, but I have no regrets. My only wish is that I could have met my birth mother in person. But it makes me happy to know that she never gave up on me, and that her efforts weren?t in vain. I grew up thinking my mother didn?t want me, only to learn that she had been searching for me her whole life.?

34
Articles / Wokingham children put in care hundreds of miles from home
« on: January 07, 2024, 02:39:06 PM »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-67881197

Wokingham children put in care hundreds of miles from home

By Nick Clark
Local Democracy Reporting Service

Vulnerable children have been housed in private care homes hundreds of miles away from home, new data has revealed.

Young people in Wokingham, Berkshire, have been sent as far as Lancashire, Yorkshire and North Wales.

The borough council said it was due to a lack of suitable accommodation in the local area.

It cost the authority more than ?6m between April 2022 and October 2023, figures showed.

Data obtained by the Local Democracy Reporting Service showed the council paid more than ?350,000 to one private provider in Preston, about ?100,000 to First4Care which runs homes in Doncaster and upwards of ?250,000 to Life Change Care in east Lancashire.
'Vast profits'

Money was also paid to children's care homes in Norfolk, Kent, Hampshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire and Wales.

Councillor Prue Bray, responsible for children's care in Wokingham, said she wanted the authority to open more of its own homes.

She said: "There will always be some children who need really specialist care but at the moment we are one of a large number of authorities who have found ourselves with children where there's no place for them anywhere in the country.

"If you've got a child in that situation, the nearest place might be Scotland or Wales - just horrendous."

It can cost tens of thousands of pounds a week to house a child with a private firm, with many operating from hedge funds and making "vast" profits, the council said.

The authority has bought three properties in Earley and Arborfield which it plans to open as homes for children.

35
Articles / Delay and frustration in adoption law's first year
« on: December 31, 2023, 04:19:34 PM »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cp3dx01v8x8o

Delay and frustration in adoption law's first year

Eimear Flanagan
BBC News NI

Published
3 October 2023

An Irish law that gave adopted people the right to access their birth records has led to more than 10,000 applications during its first year of operation.  The Birth Information and Tracing Act, external was designed to end much of the secrecy embedded in Ireland's 70-year-old adoption system.  But for many adoptees waiting decades for answers about their early lives, the new procedures meant delays and frustration.  The legislation created a new family tracing service and throughout the year 5,500 requests to find relatives were submitted.  However, due to the complexity of some searches, 53% of tracing requests are yet to be allocated to staff.  "I am relying on a system that is working at a snail's pace," said Linda Southern, who is searching for her birth parents.

The 48-year-old Dubliner was adopted in 1975 at six weeks of age.  She spent her first 47 years not knowing her birth name nor the names of her mother and father.  That is because until 3 October 2022, Irish adoptees had no automatic right to see their own birth certificates, nor to know their biological parents' identities.  The new law was supposed to give adoptees access to birth records within 30 days, or 90 days in complex cases.  Two organisations tasked with releasing records struggled to handle an early surge of applications.  The Adoption Authority of Ireland (AAI) and child and family agency Tusla both missed statutory deadlines.  "The initial surge led to wait times which would be frustrating and which we regret," said AAI interim chief executive Colm O'Leary.

"When you're starting off a process and you're learning that records are held across various sources, it takes time to become familiar with all of the record types," he explained.

A Tusla spokeswoman said "a significant portion of the applications are classified as complex which means they require more time".

But adoptees argue authorities should have been better prepared.  "Surely, state bodies would have had a basic idea of the number of adoptees who would want to at least get their birth information," said Ms Southern.

After initial delays, she received her own documents which for the first time revealed her original name and parents' names.  However, she still needs help finding her biological family and spent the past year waiting for news.  "I don't know if they will ever trace my birth mother or not.  If they can't, I should be told," she said.

"They should have presumed the majority would want to trace better to presume that too many people would wish to trace birth families than too few."

'Belfast baby'

Loraine Jackson had hoped her birth files might shed some light on her cross-border adoption.  She grew up in Dublin, with barely any information about her birth.  But in her early 40s, she found out she was actually a native of the United Kingdom, having been born to a single mother in Belfast in 1948.  Her parents died years before she could trace them.  When she spoke to BBC News NI last year, she expressed hope her files might reveal how or why she was taken across the border for adoption.  After months of waiting, a "fat package" arrived in the post which included an unredacted version of her adoption agreement.  For the first time, she saw her relatives' signatures and finally found out who authorised her adoption.  "My birth mother had not been present at the signing. Her sister signed for her," Ms Jackson explained.

She also expected her files would contain information about the standard of care she received in Bethany children's home in Dublin.  But apart from a photocopy of her name in Bethany's admission book, she was disappointed.  "The information just didn't seem to be there. Whether records were not kept as well in those days, I don't know."

Although left with many unanswered questions, her maternal aunt's role in her adoption was new information to her.  "It was definitely worthwhile doing, and I'd advise anyone who hasn't applied yet to go for it."

AAI staff received a wide range of feedback from adoptees about their birth files from delight to disappointment to disbelief.  "A lot of people have said: 'Is that it? Is there nothing else?'" Mr O'Leary said.

He acknowledged some adoptees were dismayed to learn that nothing more exists on file than details they already knew.  Others have received heavily censored documents.  "Sometimes the authority gets records that are already redacted prior to us getting them we cannot unredact it," Mr O'Leary explained.

He also said AAI staff can apply redactions themselves, in cases where personal information refers to a third party.  However, he added applicants can request a review if they believe files were "inappropriately redacted".  The interim chief executive acknowledged the AAI's 12 social workers have "significant" tracing workloads.  But he said tracing "is not a linear process" and adoptees often pause the search themselves to digest new information.  "You're dealing with a very emotive situation," Mr O'Leary said.

"People may initiate a trace, thinking that their birth mother would want to hear from them, and they have to take on board that the birth mother does not want contact."

But the new law produced positive outcomes too - the AAI's tracing service has facilitated 44 family reunions.  "Sometimes I'll go to the kitchen and I'll see a social worker taking out the fancy crockery and making tea" Mr O'Leary said.

"They're bringing it into a room where a family is being reunited."

He added that when staff help connect families "there is a sense of success, and of delivering on the legislation".

The AAI's backlog of birth record applications is almost cleared and by last week, just 56 were outstanding.  Tusla has a much larger backlog which it expects to clear by June 2024.  It said from 1 September, all new applications are being processed "within statutory timelines".

If you are affected by the issues raised in this story, help and support can be found at BBC Action Line.

36
Articles / Life 'amazing' after adopting triplets - Coventry couple
« on: December 31, 2023, 03:57:05 PM »
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-coventry-warwickshire-67754231

Life 'amazing' after adopting triplets - Coventry couple

21 December

By Vanessa Pearce
BBC News, West Midlands

A couple who have adopted three-year-old triplets said life had become "much more amazing and stressful and fun".

Paul and Richard have spent years making Christmas special for their local community in Coventry, putting on spectacular light shows and raising more then ?30,000 for charity.  Now they are set to spend their first Christmas as an extended family after adopting the children in July.  "It's changed the whole thing, it's going to be crazy," said Paul.

"We went into the adoption process not knowing what to expect, but it is almost like it was meant to be."

The couple said they had always wanted children but had not previously considered taking on three of them at once.  "Last January I was looking through the online forum where details of the children were, when I spotted these triplets and thought there was no way would we get them, no way would we be able to help them," the 42-year-old electrician explained.

"Unbeknown to me my other half Richard had also spotted them."

He said they had talked through the decision, taking into consideration the cost and space in the house.  "Everyone was saying how mad we were," said Paul, "but every negative each of us brought up, one of us found a positive to overcome it.  The way it has worked out has been absolutely amazing."

The process of applying to adopt had been "gruelling," he added, "but it's so rewarding, they're so adorable, they're just a joy to be around."

Richard, 39, described the adoption process as "quite intense and very intrusive" but said, now they were home and settled with the children, to have Christmas with their own little family was "just beautiful".  Paul said the couple had been supported by the adoption agency and local authority.  "They've both been fully on board with us," he added.

The couple were nominated for a BBC CWR Make A Difference Award for being good neighbours, for their annual Coundon Christmas light show.  Paul said he had first been inspired to put up decorations as a 12-year-old after spotting a neighbour's display.  "I bought some lights with my pocket money and stuck them in the tree," he said.

"And each year it got bigger and bigger and the family started coming around, and then the neighbours."

About 500 people attended this year's lights switch-on, a first for their new family.  "The music was playing and the lights were flashing, they took in the crowds and were excited," he said.

"But they just kept thinking it was their party and were so happy about that.  I know we've given them a secure home for them to grow up in, but I think it's made our family complete by them being here - it's such a warm feeling."

37
https://www.brusselstimes.com/838673/catholic-church-put-up-30000-children-for-adoption-without-mothers-consent

Catholic Church put up 30,000 children for adoption without mothers' consent
Thursday, 14 December 2023
By The Brussels Times with Belga

The Catholic Church sold around 30,000 children to adoptive parents without their mother's consent or knowledge, new testimonies reported by Het Laatste Nieuws reveal.  Created just after World War Two, institutions run by nuns took in underage girls and pregnant unmarried women until the late 1980s. These women were subjected to unpaid labour, humiliating conditions, and in some cases, sexual abuse.  During childbirth, some women were given general anaesthetic while others had to wear a mask all ways to prevent mothers from seeing their child, who were immediately separated after birth. Some women were even sterilised. Others were forced to sign a document renouncing their child or were told the child was stillborn.  The children were then sold for large sums between 10,000 and 30,000 Belgian francs (roughly between ?250 and ?750), sometimes much more to adoptive families.  Unkept or destroyed files are now making reunion processes extremely difficult, says Debby Mattys (57), who was put up for adoption by the nuns and spent over 20 years looking for her birth mother. "My mother was 18 years old when she had an unwanted pregnancy," she told Het Laaste Nieuws.

"The Church has a crushing responsibility. Not just for what happened in the past even now they still abuse power by allowing files to disappear or because they do not actively cooperate in the inspection of files. Apologies are nice, but they don't buy us anything."

In 2015, the Bishops' Conference apologised to the victims of forced adoptions in Catholic institutions at the Flemish Parliament.  In response to recent testimonies, the bishops have expressed their compassion for victims' pain and trauma. The Church is calling for an independent investigation into the conditions described by the women involved.

38
https://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/article/failed-adoption

As someone who was adopted as a baby, I'm here to tell you that no child should be treated like an unwanted Christmas gift, no matter how much trauma we come with

?Adoption is not like pick-n-mix."

By Michele Theil
3 December 2021

Earlier this week, BBC Woman?s Hour posted a clip of their interview with former BBC journalist Eleanor Bradford to talk about her experiences of adoption, and specifically about her ?heartbreaking? decision to return her adopted child to care after eight years.  I am an adoptee myself, who was lucky to be adopted shortly after birth and given a better life than I probably would have had elsewhere. When I saw this pop up on Twitter, I was curious, but what she said appalled me. Bradford said that she decided to give her son back into care because of his behavioural issues, which caused problems for her other son (they are biological brothers), in what is termed by professionals as a ?failed adoption.?  Failed adoptions do not happen often, with chief executive at the charity Adoption UK saying that ?only around 3 to 4%? occur each year.

But, what happens in these situations are extremely private and are usually on the recommendation of professionals who feel that a child might be better served elsewhere. It is incredibly rare that an adoptive mother would choose to ?return? their child to care like an unwanted Christmas gift.  She mentioned that though the family feels ?an emptiness? from the absence of her son, she said it wasn?t ?entirely negative? because she now could place her bag on the table. In a piece written for The Sunday Times over the weekend, Bradford explained that her son was ?determined to create a chaotic environment,? and implied that he was prone to theft, thus forcing her to lock away her purse and hide the key from him. Luckily for her, she no longer has to do that!  Though Bradford claims this decision was best for all involved, and has ?reset? her relationship with her son, she entirely overlooked the trauma associated with this decision, compounding the feelings of abandonment he likely experienced prior to adoption.  Plus, there has been a lack of consideration as to how his younger brother might feel about this. Bradford?s decision to adopt both boys was to keep them from being separated in the first place, but because one didn?t turn out perfect, the brothers were separated anyway.  She wrote, ?the younger one is a joy to parent: a poster boy for adoption,? which is an abhorrent way to discuss adoption.

Adoption is not like pick-n-mix, you don?t get to throw away the imperfect ones. What about the long-lasting trauma for the younger child, who may feel like every little mistake could be the reason he is sent away like his brother?

I was never a ?perfect child?, and in many respects, I certainly do not live up to some expectations that were set for me at a young age. My mum wanted me to be a lawyer, live at home in Hong Kong, and live up to the ideal of a ?perfect Chinese daughter?. Instead, I am a journalist living in the U.K, miles away from being a ?perfect Chinese daughter? but this isn?t a reason for abandonment.  Bradford also said: ?It?s ironic that we have done so much to give those children a better life, and yet when it goes wrong, we are unsupported, and we can?t speak out.?, arguing that there is a taboo faced by people who go through ?failed adoptions.?

Her rhetoric, and the framing of her situation by the BBC, suggests that she is a kind-hearted person who fell victim to the failures of the adoption and care system, with her distress being more paramount than the care deserved by her child.   Centring herself in the narrative, she did not mention how her son reacted to being ?left behind? again, forced back into care after eight years with who he thought was his ?forever family?. She adds that she ?is still his mum?, and that the family stay in regular contact with him. But children, whether adopted or biological, should not be treated this way.

The ?stigma? that Bradford says she has faced for her decision is well and truly justified: adopted children should not be treated like a crappy gift from a distant relative, we can?t be sent back for store credit.  We deserve respect and we deserve to have loving families who will support us through ups and downs, just like you would a biological child. If a biological child was acting out and exhibiting ?behavioural issues,? you would likely seek counselling or behavioural adjustment therapy, perhaps send them to a new school with more structure, or a number of other solutions you wouldn?t give them away or leave them to fend for themselves.  Parents face a myriad of issues from their children, which can involve drinking, drugs, teenage pregnancy, bad grades, stealing, or anything else they may disapprove of. What they do in such situations is individual to the needs of the parent and the child, but I would bet that the majority of parents out there would stand by and support their children unconditionally, if they can, because that?s their child. Adopted children should not be treated differently when an adoptive parent signs on the dotted line agreeing to care for that child, they become yours for life.  As an adoptee who definitely ticked off almost every box on the ?difficult teenager? checklist, I cannot be more thankful that my adoptive parents did not make the same decision as Bradford. I often stayed out all night drinking, would shoplift for the thrill, and have experimented with drugs. But, not once did they ever consider ?sending me back? because I was their child, for better or for worse.  There are so many families in the UK who want children and I?m sure many of them would find Bradford?s decision abhorrent as they would do anything to have a child, including one that may have a disability or be neurodivergent, like her son. But, unlike most of them, she gave up on helping her child overcome the challenges that he faced.  I am not the only person, nor the only adoptee who feels this way. Deputy Editor of The Face Magazine Jessica Morgan tweeted yesterday: ?As someone who is adopted, I find this woman absolutely repulsive. Children are not toys, nor are they disposable like this. If you adopt a child, you do the work. Yes, we come with baggage, trauma, issues, even mental health issues and putting them back in care only hurts them more.?

There are countless more tweets and reactions to Bradford?s story, all expressing the same shock and disapproval at her son being sent back to care, as well as her choice to publicly announce it like it is something to be proud of.  Adoption is a very noble prospect, and those that can give children a home are to be lauded. But, giving away your adopted child just because you couldn?t deal with them is not acceptable, and it is important to remember that adoptees are not toys, they are real people who will be devastatingly affected by these decisions.

39
https://www.irishcentral.com/roots/history/jane-russell-adopt-irish-baby

Actress Jane Russell's adoption of Irish baby nearly ended her career
The glamourous Hollywood star?s career nearly came to an end after she controversially adopted an Irish baby in 1951.
James Wilson
@jameswilson1919
Feb 03, 2023

Hollywood star Jane Russell?s adoption of an Irishwoman?s child in 1952 nearly ended the actress?s career.  Russell had already adopted a girl with her husband, NFL quarterback, and kicker Bob Waterfield, but wanted to expand their family, according to TheJournal.ie.  News of the star?s desire for another child reached Hannah McDermott, a Derry woman then living in London with her husband and young son. Reportedly Hannah offered her custody of baby Thomas on condition that Jane and Bob provided him with a good home, love, and education.  When the news made the papers, the controversy rippled across the world and young McDermott suddenly found her home in London besieged by photographers.  Local historian Willie Deery told the Belfast Telegraph he believes McDermott was motivated out of love for her child, ?Hannah came in for a lot of criticism, but I think what she did was out of love for her child.  And the adoption caused Jane Russell all sorts of grief. Howard Hughes thought all the bad press would finish her and he ordered her to return the boy, but she stood her ground and refused to give up the child.?

Baby Thomas was issued with a passport by Ireland?s London Embassy where staff were oblivious to the child?s true need for documentation. After the scandal broke, a Government memo circulated claiming that the entire incident was a ?publicity stunt? by Russell and that one of the guarantors for the passport?s application had explicitly stated the baby was not being adopted.  And it was not just Irish civil servants who had had the wool pulled over their eyes. British legislation had come into force the year before banning such adoptions and Home Secretary (Justice Minister) Sir Maxwell Fyfe told Parliament nine days after the ?adoption? that authorities believed the child was traveling to America for a three-month ?holiday?.  Today, both Bob Waterfield and Jane Russell have passed away, and their son Thomas remains in the United States, reportedly living in Arizona.  He was one of thousands of Irish children adopted by American couples during the 1950s. Most of them, unlike Thomas, were born outside wedlock and state papers reveal that as many as ten a month were placed in US homes.  Back then, the Irish Government played little role in the practice, restricting themselves to issuing each child with a passport, trusting the Catholic Church?s vetting of prospective parents.  As most were born out of wedlock and living in homes, one Minister for Justice Gerald Boland wrote that he ?favored the sending of children to America for adoption in suitable homes where the alternative would be life in an institution in this country?.

It was an attitude not uttered in public but one that quietly prevailed in the Irish Government, so much so that they did everything to facilitate such adoptions. One memo warned that it would be, ?quite embarrassing if, in some case, a child had to be left in this country owing to the impossibility of issuing a passport in time?.

Disturbingly, Irish diplomats even wrote boastful memos back to Dublin that ?Moreover, there is no ?color? problem here [in Ireland] so that intending foster parents in the US know that Irish children are ?guaranteed? in that respect.?

Subsequently, it?s been revealed that the vetting process in America was not as above-board as the Irish Government assumed. Monsignor O?Grady of the Catholic Charities admitted in 1956 that some of the charity?s adoptions had been ?irregular? and organized by a ?commercial operator? in Texas and Wisconsin?.  The idea of an Irish child being bought and sold clearly rattled Ireland?s Department of External Affairs and in the wake of the Russell case a letter between London and Dublin was fired off stating, ?I have taken an extreme case for my example but the fact is that, if any child who left this country for adoption in America figured in an unsavory press campaign, racket or other exposure, it is this Department that would face the music.?

Nevertheless, the practice continued right up until 1970. In 2013 a British film, "Philomena," was released starring Dame Judi Dench dramatizing the story of a mother who goes in search of her son in America some 60 years after his forced adoption in Ireland.

* Originally published in Jan 2017. Updated in February 2023.

40
https://www.joe.ie/news/paul-redmond-pope-francis-crash-course-magdalene-laundry-638178?utm_source=facebook&fbclid=IwAR01Cx3XK5Vh-J2c3Ed0pZ084KBCW0bEv74Rh8pWz_kIX_rzQ_r0pk1VA90

Clerical abuse survivor Paul Redmond explains why he had to give Pope Francis "crash course" on Magdalene Laundries

"Ireland is unique in the 20th century in having such institutions."

Chairperson of the Coalition of Mother and Baby Home Survivors Paul Redmond has clarified why he had to give Pope Francis a "crash course" on the history of the Magdalene Laundries and industrial schools during their meeting on Saturday.  Redmond was one of eight clerical abuse survivors that met with Pope Francis during what he described as a "very intense" weekend.  In conversation with Caitriona Perry on RT? News: Six One on Sunday evening, Redmond noted that the Pope didn't have adequate knowledge of institutional abuse in Ireland.  "Just to clarify that, because people seem quite puzzled by that, that the Pope was unfamiliar with with a Magdalene Laundry was or an industrial school; Ireland is unique in the 20th century in having such institutions," Redmond began.

"They really started in Victorian Britain. We obviously inherited them, but by 1900 the British had realised that large scale institutional care simply doesn't work, and they started closing down their institutions.  The Catholic Church had taken them over in Ireland and we kept them right into the 1980s and into the 1990s, so they're quite unique to Ireland. The Pope had no - there's no parallel in Argentina or South America with these sort of institutions.  One of the survivors was explaining what happened to her in an industrial school and I actually had to jump in and spend three or four minutes giving the Pope a crash course in what Irish institutions were and what happened."

Redmond noted that he gave the Pope "a number of facts and figures" and upon detailing specific incidences, Pope Francis "put his hands up to his head a couple of times" and was "clearly shocked and taken aback" at what he was hearing.  Asked how he felt when Pope Francis asked for forgiveness of abuse carried out by the church in Ireland, Redmond said that he felt some sense of relief.  "We went in asking for what we've been asking for from church and state for years, which is a full acknowledgement, apology and a redress package for survivors particularly because our community is generally elderly and dying.  We didn't expect to get that," Redmond continued. "The fact that he asked for forgiveness was a step in the right direction.  What we were hoping for was that he would address the issue of the fact that natural mothers and to some extent, adoptees were told back in the day that the search and look for reunion was immortal sin and they would burn in hell for it, and that it was a criminal offence and illegal."

Redmond acknowledged that the Pope took the requests and sentiment of the survivors on board and addressed it fully during his mass at the Phoenix Park.  "I am delighted about that," said Paul. "That is definitely a huge step forward for our community. A lot of us suffer in silence."

It was underlined that despite this progress, Pope Francis didn't offer a definitive apology.  "No, and we knew he never would any more than the government will, or any of the individual orders or nuns," said Redmond.

"An apology is a legal admission of liability and they simply will not do that. The church and state are going to have to be dragged to that kicking and screaming."

41
https://www.room151.co.uk/funding/rise-childrens-social-care-placements/

1,000% rise in five years in number of children?s social care placements costing ?10,000 per week
by Jason Holland
in 151 News ? Funding ? Social care
29 Nov, 2023

A survey of councils conducted by the Local Government Association has revealed a startling rise in the cost of children?s social care placements.  The number of such placements costing ?10,000 or more per week has risen by over 1,000% in five years.  There were 120 of these placements in 2018/19, rising to 1,510 in 2022/23, while the proportion of councils with at least one children?s social care placement has increased from 23% to 91% over the same period.  The survey found that the highest cost placement was ?63,000 a week. For most councils the highest cost fell between ?9,600 and ?32,500 a week.  A lack of choice in placements is driving the high prices, with nearly every council 98 per cent citing this as a cause.  Some 93% of councils also highlighted children needing help with increasingly complex needs, including mental health needs or exhibiting challenging behaviours, as a factor.  The Local Government Association said the findings demonstrated a ?broken? market for children?s social care placements, and called for ?urgent investment in provision that can best meet children?s needs?, on behalf of councils.

The organisation said there were three key areas for government action, including rolling out planned Department for Education programmes on the recruitment and retention of foster carers to all councils.  The LGA also called for the expansion of children?s homes through capital investment, recruitment and professional development of children?s homes workers and working with the voluntary and community sector.  The third action area is working with DHSC and NHS England on both inpatient mental health facilities and joint delivery of placements for children with complex mental health needs, the LGA said.  The LGA added that it is ?vital? that councils ?are able to invest in earlier support for children and families to reduce the number of children who need to be in the care of their council, and that councils are provided with longer term funding settlements to enable them to plan ahead?.

The LGA is calling for urgent funding for children?s social care in the upcoming provisional Local Government Finance Settlement. It warned the lack of investment in the Autumn Statement ?risked councils? ability to provide the critical care and support that children rely on every day?.

Louise Gittins, chair of the LGA?s Children and Young People Board, said: ?With more children needing help with increasingly complex and challenging needs, what is most important is ensuring they get the best care and support. It is concerning that in many cases, a lack of choice means provision is not fully meeting children?s needs.  The astronomical costs of care placements mean there is less money available for councils to spend on earlier support for children and families.  These findings are indicative of a broken market for children?s social care placements, but it doesn?t have to remain this way. With cross-government support, it is possible to make sure we have the right homes for all of the children in our care.?

42
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-no-apology-unwed-mothers-1.5247545?__vfz=medium%3Dsharebar&fbclid=IwAR0DhFIRSnS98gwz2NXVRHX6PpbCPDnLvDCRk1k4uQU7zT9tjSn-ovGsr3I

'Bad girls': Remembering when unwed mothers were told to forget their babies
Parliament doesn't answer call to apologize to women forced to give up their children
Rachel Cave ? CBC News ? Posted: Aug 16, 2019 4:00 AM EDT | Last Updated: August 16, 2019

Marie Crouse, who gave up her baby for adoption when she was 15, says she's not waiting to hear "sorry" from Ottawa, even though a Senate committee says thousands of Canadian women like her are owed an apology for the way they were treated in the postwar years for getting pregnant outside marriage.  The committee's report, titled "The Shame is Ours" tabled July 19, 2018, gave Parliament one year to acknowledge the impact of "unethical adoption practices" inflicted on women in church-run maternity homes that received federal funding across the country.   The committee heard emotional testimony from mothers who said they felt banished from their communities, pressured into giving up their parental rights and warned not to go looking for their babies, who would never forgive them their sins.  The Senate called on the federal government to acknowledge and apologize to the estimated 350,000 women who were forced to give up their babies for adoption between 1945 and 1971, simply because they were not married.

School principal noticed

Crouse watched the hearings in March from her home in Wakefield, north of Woodstock, and some of what she heard sounded like her story.  The oldest of eight children, Crouse said she had a rebellious side and was dating boys by age 14.  Neither her father, who hauled logs, nor her homemaker mother taught her the facts of life, she said, and the public schools did not fill in the gaps.  "The only sex education you got was in the back seat of a car or from your friends who didn't know much more than you did," said Crouse.

When she was in Grade 10, the principal of Hartland High School called her into his office and told her she couldn't attend classes anymore because her pregnancy was showing.  Crouse refused to believe she was pregnant.  In December of that year, 1962, her father hired someone to drive Crouse to Saint John in the company of her mother, who dropped her off at the Evangeline Home run by the Salvation Army.  "They had to get me out of town before anybody knew that I was pregnant," Crouse said. "That would have been their shame."

Growing up in Coldstream, Crouse had never travelled farther than Woodstock.  According to a historical sketch from the Provincial Archives, the hospital was then working solely for unmarried mothers, principally from New Brunswick and Prince Edward Island, although girls were also accepted from Nova Scotia, Quebec, Ontario, Newfoundland, and the western provinces, as well as Maine and Florida.   

'We should have never gotten pregnant'

Crouse remembers living on the third floor of the Princess Street building for about three months, along with at least two dozen other girls who came and went at any given time. Crouse says they all received some religious instruction.

And she says, one by one, they would be called into the Salvation Army captain's office, where Crouse remembers being asked, "how we got into this and what our plans were."

"I hate to say brainwashed," said Crouse recalling these talks. "But it was a lot to the fact that we were bad girls. We should not have had sex without being married. We should have never gotten pregnant.  And we were told we should never look for these babies because these babies would never want to know us because we were bad."

After giving birth to a daughter on March 3, 1963, and naming her Michelle, Crouse remained in the home for 14 days and was expected to change the baby and feed her.  On reflection, she thinks it was a form of punishment allowing young mothers to bond with infants before "ripping them away."  As her final act of rebellion, and in defiance of the Evangeline Home's rules against taking pictures, Crouse purchased a small camera in a nearby shop. She persuaded a nurse to take a picture of her, holding her daughter on her last day in Saint John.  She wouldn't see Michelle again for 28 years.

Someday, I'll find her

Crouse knew she wasn't going to be taking the baby home with her, but she can't remember being informed about adoption or signing a form giving up her parental rights.  Instead of obeying the instructions to "forget this ever happened," Crouse said, she went looking for her daughter in the 1980s.

However, New Brunswick's sealed records policy prevented her from seeing the names of her daughter's adoptive parents.  By then, Ron and Irma Getchell had moved to the United States and had renamed the baby, Carolynne.  Crouse turned to Parent Finders, a volunteer group that was actively working to reunite adopted children and their birth parents. In the years before Facebook, the group relied heavily on church records, obituaries and word of mouth to solve their cases.  In the end, it was Crouse's daughter who found her, by phoning the province's post-adoption services department. While the province had a policy of "protecting" the identities of individuals involved in adoptions, once a child turned 19, he or she could register their consent to be found.  That's how Carolynne was finally put in touch with Crouse, and they met for the first time in 1991, when Carolynne was 28 years old.  Their relationship is strong to this day, Crouse said, and Carolynne was visiting from New Hampshire just last week.

Detective work as therapy

By 1997, Crouse had taken on the unpaid position of president of Parent Finders and today, at age 72, she sees no retirement on the horizon.  According to her records, she and her team solved more than 500 cases over the past 22 years and have another 30 pending.  On April 1, 2018, New Brunswick moved to modernize its records policy, allowing adult adoptees to access the names of their birth parents.  But Crouse is convinced her searchers will stay busy.   "A name is sometimes just the start," she says.

"People marry, they change their names, they move away and sometimes they move out of the country," said Crouse, who has tracked down individuals living as far away as Puerto Rico and Bolivia.

She said people still need help to fill out forms and make sensitive phone calls.  "And that's more help than anything from the Senate," she said.

No apology from the Salvation Army

The Salvation Army, which ran the Evangeline Home in Saint John from 1898 to 1978, declined an interview.  An emailed statement sent from Jamie Locke, divisional secretary for public relations, said the Salvation Army did present a brief to the Senate committee based on results from an internal review it conducted in 2013, which found the organization had no legal or practical role in the adoption process itself.  "Instead the Salvation Army provided safe housing, meals and structured activities to meet the immediate needs of the women housed, followed by health care during and immediately after the birth of their child."

It's an answer that doesn't satisfy Valerie Andrews, who pressed for the Senate review and was herself a 17-year-old unwed mother at the Salvation Army's Toronto Grace Hospital, where she gave birth to a boy in 1970 and gave him up for adoption.  In her 2017 thesis, submitted to York University, Andrews says her research suggests some 300,000 unmarried Canadian women were systematically separated from their babies at birth between 1940 and 1970.  She said many were psychologically coerced. In a maternity home, talk about keeping your baby was not looked upon well, she said.  "It was the mature, respectable, responsible girl who chose adoption," Andrews said. "It was the 'other kind of girl' who wanted to keep her baby. The selfish girl, the foolish girl, the other kind of girl."

Andrews heard from mothers who never saw their children or were never told their gender.  "I mean, these babies were grabbed off delivery tables and whisked away, mothers seeing little mops of black hair being whisked away."

Some mothers in Canada's maternity homes were told their babies had died.   "That's why we fought for this Senate study," she said. "To bring out the illegal, unethical and human rights abuses that were perpetrated against unmarried mothers in the postwar period."

The standing Senate committee on social affairs, science and technology, which conducted the review and issued the report, is now chaired by Sen. Chantal Petitclerc.  CBC News tried to speak to her about the passing of the committee's deadline for an apology from Parliament and the fact none has been given. She declined to be interviewed.

43
Articles / 'We must stop blaming mothers in child protection social work?
« on: November 29, 2023, 03:09:09 PM »
https://www.communitycare.co.uk/2023/11/24/we-must-stop-blaming-mothers-in-child-protection-social-work/

'We must stop blaming mothers in child protection social work?
A social work trainer says practitioners too often make mothers solely responsible for their children's safety, even when they are domestic abuse victims, undermining the effectiveness of interventions with families
November 24, 2023 in Children
by Vicki Shevlin

When I started in social work, I thought I would be prepared to manage the misogyny embedded in practice. But when it came to working with mothers who were victims of domestic abuse, I found myself developing habits that amounted to poor practice.  Without realising it, influenced by others on my team, I began focusing all my initial contact on mothers. I was arranging home visits based on when they were at home with their children, relying on them to share information and give consent, and, worst, holding them accountable for implementing the ?safety? in safety plans.  My practice began to emulate what is known as ?mother blaming?; a phrase commonly used in literature to describe the discourse of ?disproportionate responsibilisation of women for the protection of children and for their partners? abuse? (Wild, 2022).

What is ?mother blaming??

Mother blaming occurs when practitioners perpetuate the ideology that mothers are primarily responsible for the safety, wellbeing and care of children (Strega et al, 2008), even when they themselves are victims.  This may look like inviting mothers to meetings, but not following up when fathers do not attend. Sometimes, it may be the writing of safety plans that heavily rely on mothers to take certain actions to ?provide safety?, with fathers omitted completely such as a reliance on mothers to uphold recommended contact arrangements.  As a new social worker then, certain habits became embedded. I was writing sentences talking about ?mothers? capacity to protect? and not taking steps to look into what fathers were doing.  I look back on supervisions where I talked about ?hidden? or ?unseen? men but I now know that, without action, my use of the phrases simply reinforced the problem.  It wasn?t enough for me to recognise that a male perpetrator was missing from my intervention I needed to do something about it.  On one occasion, a mother told me she had felt I was blaming her, rather than supporting her. She didn?t trust that I would genuinely help her.

The impact of mother blaming

If social workers hold a narrow viewpoint that mothers are solely to blame for the behaviour and actions of perpetrators, it reduces the likelihood of them building strong and meaningful relationships with parents. This affects the effectiveness of interventions with children and families.  When blame is unfairly placed on mothers, it also disproportionately affects those who are part of the global majority, living in poverty or systematically marginalised.  There is also a risk of social workers causing harm through secondary victimisation, where victims suffer further harm because of the behaviour and attitudes of professionals.  As social workers, we have to question the ideologies that we are modelling to children and young people in the way we treat their family members.

?You can centre children and hold empathy for mothers?

The Children Act 1989 says the welfare and safety of children is paramount.  Many practitioners feel that they cannot prioritise the safety of children and at the same time acknowledge mothers as victims of domestic abuse. This is often attributed to legislation and policy focusing solely on children?s safety and the lack of services available to victims.  As a result, mothers are repeatedly held accountable for the actions of perpetrators.  It is important that, as social workers, we understand the limitations of binary thinking.  You can centre children and hold empathy for mothers. You can assess and support; care for families in a problematic system and stay conscious of the risks of mother blaming.  You don?t have to choose one or the other.

What needs to change

This starts with social work leaders who are committed to cultural change. Managers should be committed to changing habits, challenging language and, ultimately, encouraging their teams to think critically about systemic bias, particularly around domestic abuse.  Changing entrenched practice approaches is not simple. Many of us don?t want to admit that it is often easier to work with a parent who answers the phone, turns up to meetings or is more likely to be at home when we visit.  When effort is not put into trying to contact perpetrators, it is a choice, albeit one exacerbated by high caseloads, emotional stress and organisational pressure. Practitioners have to be supported in this.

Abandoning problematic language

Social workers are often required to be lead professionals in cases of domestic abuse. When you chair meetings, you should talk about the tendency of professionals to attribute blame to mothers whilst ignoring fathers. This can set the tone for further conversations, planning and interventions that take a systemic approach.  Local authorities can also make a commitment to stop using unhelpful terminology such as ?mother?s failure to protect? or ?father not engaging?. It?s problematic and perpetuates harmful tropes.  Social workers need to be supported to include alternative approaches in their assessments. This includes training specific to perpetrator behavior as well as mother and child relationships.  When you understand a child?s world and lived experience, you can gain insight into complex relationships that can be harmed when we make reductive assumptions.

References

Strega, S, Fleet, C, Brown, L, Dominelli, L, Callahan, M, Walmsley, C (2008) ?Connecting father absence and mother blame in child welfare policies and practice? Children and Youth Services Review 30(7)

Wild, J (2022) ?Gendered Discourses of Responsibility and Domestic Abuse Victim-Blame in the English Children?s Social Care System? Journal of Family Violence 38(3)

44
https://www.thereporteronline.com/2023/11/06/inspired-by-online-dating-ai-tool-for-adoption-matchmaking-falls-short-for-vulnerable-foster-kids/

Inspired by online dating, AI tool for adoption matchmaking falls short for vulnerable foster kids

By SALLY HO and GARANCE BURKE (Associated Press)

Some are orphans, others seized from their parents. Many are older and have overwhelming needs or disabilities. Most bear the scars of trauma from being hauled between foster homes, torn from siblings or sexually and physically abused.  Child protective services agencies have wrestled for decades with how to find lasting homes for such vulnerable children and teens a challenge so enormous that social workers can never guarantee a perfect fit.  Into this morass stepped Thea Ramirez with what she touted as a technological solution an artificial intelligence-powered tool that ultimately can predict which adoptive families will stay together. Ramirez claimed this algorithm, designed by former researchers at an online dating service, could boost successful adoptions across the U.S. and promote efficiency at cash-strapped child welfare agencies.  ?We?re using science not merely preferences ? to establish a score capable of predicting long-term success,? Ramirez said in an April 2021 YouTube video about her ambitions to flip ?the script on the way America matches children and families? using the Family-Match algorithm.

An Associated Press investigation, however, found that the AI tool among the few adoption algorithms on the market has produced limited results in the states where it has been used, according to Family-Match?s self-reported data that AP obtained through public records requests from state and local agencies.  Ramirez also has overstated the capabilities of the proprietary algorithm to government officials as she has sought to expand its reach, even as social workers told AP that the tool wasn?t useful and often led them to unwilling families.  Virginia and Georgia dropped the algorithm after trial runs, noting its inability to produce adoptions, though both states have resumed business with Ramirez?s nonprofit called Adoption-Share, according to AP?s review of hundreds of pages of documents.  Tennessee scrapped the program before rolling it out, saying it didn?t work with their internal system even after state officials spent more than two years trying to set it up, and social workers reported mixed experiences with Family-Match in Florida, where its use has been expanding.  State officials told AP that the organization that Ramirez runs as CEO owns some of the sensitive data Family-Match collects. They also noted that the nonprofit provided little transparency about how the algorithm works.  Those experiences, the AP found, provide lessons for social service agencies seeking to deploy predictive analytics without a full grasp of the technologies? limitations, especially when trying to address such enduring human challenges as finding homes for children described by judges as the ?least adoptable.?  ?There?s never going to be a foolproof way for us to be able to predict human behavior,? said Bonni Goodwin, a University of Oklahoma child welfare data expert. ?There?s nothing more unpredictable than adolescence.?

Ramirez, of Brunswick, Georgia, where her nonprofit is also based, refused to provide details about the algorithm?s inner workings and declined interview requests. By email, she said the tool was a starting point for social workers and did not determine whether a child would be adopted. She also disputed child welfare leaders? accounts of Family-Match?s performance.  ?User satisfaction surveys and check-ins with our agency end users indicate that Family-Match is a valuable tool and helpful to users actively using it to support their recruitment + matching efforts,? Ramirez wrote.

Ramirez, a former social worker and wife of a Georgia pastor, has long sought to promote adoption as a way to reduce abortions, according to her public statements, newsletters and a blog post.  More than a decade ago, she launched a website to connect pregnant women with potential adoptive parents. She marketed it as ?the ONLY online community exclusively for networking crisis pregnancy centers? and pledged to donate 10% of membership fees to such anti-abortion counseling centers, whose aim is to persuade women to bring their pregnancies to term.  Ramirez said in an email that Family-Match is not associated with such centers.  She next turned her focus to helping children living in foster care who don?t have family members to raise them. Most of the 50,000 children adopted nationwide in 2021 landed with relatives, federal statistics show, while about 5,000 ended up with people they didn?t previously know. Such recruitment-based adoptions are the most difficult to carry out, social workers say.  Ramirez has said she called Gian Gonzaga, a research scientist who had managed the algorithms at eharmony, a dating site with Christian roots that promises users ?real love? for those seeking marriage. She asked Gonzaga if he would team up with her to create an adoption matchmaking tool.  Gonzaga, who worked with his wife Heather Setrakian at eharmony and then on the Family-Match algorithm, referred questions to Ramirez. Setrakian said she was very proud of her years of work developing the Family-Match model.  An eharmony spokesperson, Kristen Berry, said the dating site was ?not affiliated with Family-Match.? Berry described Gonzaga and Setrakian as ?simply former employees.?

Later, Ramirez began crisscrossing the country promoting Family-Match to state officials. Her work and her religious convictions drew support primarily from conservatives, including first lady Melania Trump, who spotlighted Ramirez?s efforts at a foster care event in the White House Situation Room. Ramirez has co-written reports and given a high-profile presentation at the American Enterprise Institute, benefitted from attention-getting fundraisers and used connections to win over state officials to pilot her tool.  Social workers say Family-Match works like this: Adults seeking to adopt submit survey responses via the algorithm?s online platform, and foster parents or social workers input each child?s information.  After the algorithm generates a score measuring the ?relational fit,? Family-Match displays a list of the top prospective parents for each child. Social workers then vet the candidates.  In a best-case scenario, a child is matched and placed in a home for a trial stay; parents then submit the legal paperwork to formalize the adoption.  Family-Match first started matching families in Florida and Virginia in 2018. Virginia?s then-governor Terry McAuliffe, a Democrat, ordered a pilot at the urging of a campaign donor he appointed as the state?s ?adoption champion.? In Florida, which has a privatized child welfare system, regional care organizations soon signed up for the algorithm for free thanks to a grant from a foundation founded by the then-CEO of the company that makes Patr?n tequila and his wife.  Once philanthropic dollars dried up in Florida, the state government picked up the tab, awarding Adoption-Share a $350,000 contract last month for its services.  Pilot efforts in Tennessee and Georgia followed.  Adoption-Share has generated $4.2 million in revenue since 2016; it reported about $1.2 million in 2022, according to its tax returns.  In Virginia?s two-year test of Family-Match, the algorithm produced only one known adoption, officials said.  ?The local staff reported that they did not find the tool particularly useful,? the Virginia Department of Social Services said in a statement, noting that Family-Match ?had not proven effective? in the state.

Virginia social workers were also perplexed that the algorithm seemed to match all the children with the same group of parents, said Traci Jones, an assistant director at the state?s social services agency.  ?We did not have access to the algorithm even after it was requested,? Jones said.

By 2022, Virginia had awarded Adoption-Share an even larger contract for a different foster care initiative that the nonprofit says ?leverages? the Family-Match application.  Georgia officials said they ended their initial pilot in October 2022 because the tool didn?t work as intended, ultimately only leading to two adoptions during their year-long experiment.  Social workers said the tool?s matching recommendations often led them to unwilling parents, leading them to question whether the algorithm was properly assessing the adults? capacity to adopt those kids.  Ramirez met with the governor?s office and also lobbied a statehouse committee for a direct appropriation, saying the tool was ?an incredible feat.? By July, the Georgia Department of Human Services signed a new agreement with Adoption-Share to use Family-Match again this time for free, said Kylie Winton, an agency spokesperson.  Florida?s privatized child welfare system operates with more than a dozen regional agencies providing foster care and adoption services. When AP requested public records about their Family-Match cases, many of those agencies gave the tool mixed reviews and couldn?t explain Family-Match?s self-reported data, making it difficult to assess the algorithm?s purported success rate.  Statewide in Florida, Family-Match claimed credit for 603 placements that resulted in 431 adoptions over a five-year period, according to Adoption-Share?s third-quarter report for the 2023 fiscal year that AP obtained from a Pensacola-based child welfare organization.  Scott Stevens, an attorney representing the FamiliesFirst Network, told AP in June that only three trial placements recommended by Family-Match failed since the agency started using the algorithm in 2019. But Adoption-Share?s records that Stevens provided to the AP indicate that his agency made 76 other Family-Match placements that didn?t show the children had been formally adopted. Asked by AP for clarification, Stevens couldn?t say what happened in those 76 cases and referred further questions to Family-Match.  Ramirez declined to discuss the discrepancy but acknowledged in an email that not all matches work out.  ?Transitions can take time in the journey to adoption,? Ramirez said in an email, adding that the ?decision to finalize the adoption is ultimately the responsibility? of agencies with input from the children and judges. On Sunday, Adoption-Share posted on its Facebook page that the organization had ?reached 500 adoptions in Florida!?

Jenn Petion, the president and CEO of the organization that handles adoptions in Jacksonville, said she likes how the algorithm lets her team tap into a statewide pool of potential parents. Petion has also endorsed Family-Match for helping her find her adoptive daughter, whom she described as a ?100% match? in an Adoption-Share annual report.  Family-Match assists social workers in making ?better decisions, better matches,? Petion said, but her agency, Family Support Services declined to provide statistics about Family-Match.  The Fort Myers-based Children?s Network of Southwest Florida said in the past five years the Family-Match tool has led to 22 matches and eight adoptions, as compared to the hundreds of matches and hundreds of adoptions that its social workers did without the tool.  Bree Bofill, adoption program manager for Miami-based Citrus Family Care Network, said social workers found the tool didn?t work very well, often suggesting potential families that weren?t the right fit.  ?It?s frustrating that it?s saying that the kids are matched but in reality, when you get down to it, the families aren?t interested in them,? Bofill said of the algorithm.

Bofill also said it was difficult to assess the tool?s utility because social workers who found potential parents were sometimes asked by Family-Match officials to tell the adults to register with the tool even if it played no role in the adoption, allowing the algorithm to claim credit for the match.  Winton, the Georgia agency spokesperson, told AP about a similar issue Family-Match could claim credit for pairings if the child and parent already were in its system, even if the program didn?t generate the match. Family-Match, in an April 2023 ?confidential? user guide posted on the internet, instructed social workers not to delete cases that were matched outside the tool. Instead, they were told to document the match in the system so that Adoption-Share could refine its algorithm and follow up with the families.  Ramirez didn?t address Bofill?s claim but said in an email that Family-Match?s reports reflect what social workers input into the system.  Officials in Virginia, Georgia and Florida said they weren?t sure how the tool scored families based on the highly sensitive variables powering the algorithm.  In Georgia, Family-Match continues to gather data about whether foster youth have been sexually abused, the gender of their abuser, and whether they have a criminal record or ?identify as LGBTQIA.? That kind of information is typically restricted to tightly secured child protective services case files.  In Tennessee, a version of the algorithm?s questionnaire for prospective parents asked for their specific household income and for them to rate how ?conventional? or ?uncreative? they were. They were also asked if they agreed or disagreed with a statement about whether they seek God?s help, according to records AP obtained.  When Tennessee Department of Children?s Services reviewed the proposed Family-Match assessment, they questioned some of the information Family-Match wanted to collect. Tennessee officials asked why Family-Match needed certain sensitive data points and how that data influenced the match score, according to an internal document in which state workers noted questions and feedback about the algorithm. Ramirez said the agency didn?t challenge the survey?s validity, and said the discussions were part of the streamlining process.  Virginia officials said once families? data was entered into the tool, ?Adoption Share owned the data.?

In Florida, two agencies acknowledged that they used Family-Match informally without a contract, but would not say how children?s data was secured.  Ramirez wouldn?t say if Family-Match has deleted pilot data from its servers, but said her organization maintains a compliance audit and abides by contract terms.  Social welfare advocates and data security experts have been raising alarms about government agencies? increasing reliance on predictive analytics to assist them on the job. Those researchers and advocates say such tools can exacerbate racial disparities and discriminate against families based on characteristics they cannot change.  Adoption-Share is part of a small cadre of organizations that say their algorithms can help social workers place children with foster or adoptive families.  ?We?re using, essentially, kids as guinea pigs for these tools. They are the crash test dummies,? said Suresh Venkatasubramanian, a former assistant director of the Biden White House?s Office of Science and Technology Policy now at Brown University. ?That?s a big problem right there.?

Adoption-Share continues to try to expand, seeking business in places like New York City, Delaware and Missouri, where child welfare agency officials were reviewing its pitch. Ramirez said she also saw an opportunity last year to present Family-Match to the U.S. Health and Human Services Department ?to demonstrate our tool and how it can be a helpful resource.?

This year, Adoption-Share landed a deal with the Florida Department of Health for Family-Match to build an algorithm intended ?to increase the pool of families willing to foster and/or adopt medically complex children,? according to state contracts.

Health department officials didn?t respond to repeated requests for comment.  Connie Going, a longtime Florida social worker whose own viral adoption story Ramirez has described as her inspiration for Family-Match, said she didn?t believe the tool would help such vulnerable children. Going said the algorithm gives false hope to waiting parents by failing to deliver successful matches, and ultimately makes her job harder.  ?We?ve put our trust in something that is not 100% useful,? Going said. ?It?s wasted time for social workers and wasted emotional experiences for children.?

45
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-12679607/russian-woman-married-son.html

I've MARRIED my 22-year-old adopted son after raising him from the age of 14 officials have now taken my other five children away from me

    Aisylu Mingalim, 53, from Tatarstan, raised her now husband from the age of 14
    READ MORE: My mum paid ?15,000 for my dream wedding... then had a BABY with my husband nine months later

By Shannon Mcguigan

Published: 14:35, 27 October 2023 | Updated: 14:35, 27 October 2023

A mother has revealed how she has married her adopted son after raising him from the age of 14.  Aisylu Chizhevskaya Mingalim, 53, from Tatarstan, Russia, has left child welfare experts horrified by tying the knot with 22-year-old  Daniel Chizhevsky.  She first met Daniel when he was just 13 and working as a singing teacher at his orphanage.  Aisylu then adopted him and raised him from the age of 14.  But just eight years later the pair have now tied the knot, leaving authorities to take custody of her other adopted children.  'Our relationship is perfect. We can't live without each other. We are on the same wavelength,' she told local media.

The mother and her adopted son wed in a ceremony at a restaurant in Kazan last week.  Child welfare officials have now seized Aisylu's other five adopted children one boy and four girls.  The adoptive mother has denounced the decision, with the children reportedly having been placed into care homes or given back to their biological relatives.   She wants the children back in her care, so all of them including their adopted brother turned step-father can flee to Moscow.  The former music teacher believes the family will be able to live more 'freely' in the Russian capital.  Reportedly Aisylu has a biological son from a previous marriage, however no additional information about him has been detailed.  The former singing teacher's adoption spree started shortly after coming into contact with orphans whilst on a film project with a Tatarstan TV station.  Last year, a woman who traded in her husband for her step-son revealed she was expecting their second child.  Marina Balmasheva, 38, from Russia, already had a 20-months-old daughter with Vladimir 'Vova' Shavyrin, now 24.  She has known him since he was seven, calls him 'the most charming blue-eyes in the world', and was previously married to his father Alexey Shavyrin, 48, who now cares for their five adopted children.  Marina, who is a popular weight loss influencer, announced her baby news online, sharing a video of the moment Vladimir learned she was going to be a father for the second time.  Marina calls her second husband 'the most charming blue-eyes in the world' but scolds him on social media for being 'clumsy' pushing their daughter's pram, and failing to hold down a well paid job in Krasnodar region, close to Ukraine, where war is raging.  She makes clear that she supports him from her social media earnings rather than allow him to do a mundane office job.  After revealing her relationship with her former stepson, she said: 'So many people tell me to use makeup make lashes, and curl my pubic hair because of my young husband. 'But there is one thing he fell in love with me with all my scars from plastic surgeries, cellulite, excessive skin and personality.'

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 41