I am very excited to be signed up to join Heather Forbes and her Beyond Consequences on-line parenting classes.
Heather's Love approach to dealing with children with early trauma is the only method that makes sense to me. The basis is that babies who do not have the safely and security of a permenant primary carer fall in to a fear pattern when they are faced with stress - and this fear is played out in poor behaviour. So it is not punishment that they need but to feel safe and secure. It is not an easy parenting method as it often goes against instinct but it is very effective - not only in solving the immediate situation but in the long term of creating a safe and secure world for these children.
I will be blogging about the course and my experiences with dealing with my dahling son who has slight RAD and therefore poses challenging behaviours (for example getting up at 1.20 last night and going downstairs and putting on a video and then REFUSING to go back to bed, ending with tantrums, crying, hitting, swearing and lots and lots of foot stamping!)
I hope you will enjoy the journey as much as me, I will be posting every week over the next 10 weeks and if you would like to find out more about Beyond Consequences please check out the website
http://www.beyondconsequences.com.
Wednesday, 13 January 2010
Friday, 1 January 2010
US Governments findings
17 December 2009
Internationally Adopted Children Are Thriving, Study Shows
By Jeffrey Thomas, Staff Writer, America.gov
Washington — Even as the latest figures show a continuing multi-year decline in the number of U.S. children adopted from other countries, a U.S. government survey released in November finds that most of these international adoptees are in good health and fare well on measures of social and emotional well-being. They get a lot of attention from their parents and generally do well in school.
The survey, Adoption USA, was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services between April 2007 and June 2008 and is nationally representative. Information was drawn from more than 90,000 children who represent the nation’s 73.8 million children, including the 1.8 million who are adopted. Some key findings include:
• 87 percent of adopted children have parents who said they would “definitely” make the same decision to adopt their child, knowing everything that they now know about their child.
• More than nine out of 10 adopted children ages 5 and older have parents who perceived their child’s feelings towards the adoption as “positive” or “mostly positive.”
• Almost nine out of 10 adopted children ages 6 and older exhibit positive social behaviors.
• 85 percent of internationally adopted children have parents who reported their relationship with their child as very warm and close. In addition, 42 percent had parents who reported the relationship as “better than ever expected,” with only 15 percent reporting the relationship as “more difficult” than they expected.
http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2009/December/200912171352251CJsamohT0.1063196.html
Internationally Adopted Children Are Thriving, Study Shows
By Jeffrey Thomas, Staff Writer, America.gov
Washington — Even as the latest figures show a continuing multi-year decline in the number of U.S. children adopted from other countries, a U.S. government survey released in November finds that most of these international adoptees are in good health and fare well on measures of social and emotional well-being. They get a lot of attention from their parents and generally do well in school.
The survey, Adoption USA, was conducted by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services between April 2007 and June 2008 and is nationally representative. Information was drawn from more than 90,000 children who represent the nation’s 73.8 million children, including the 1.8 million who are adopted. Some key findings include:
• 87 percent of adopted children have parents who said they would “definitely” make the same decision to adopt their child, knowing everything that they now know about their child.
• More than nine out of 10 adopted children ages 5 and older have parents who perceived their child’s feelings towards the adoption as “positive” or “mostly positive.”
• Almost nine out of 10 adopted children ages 6 and older exhibit positive social behaviors.
• 85 percent of internationally adopted children have parents who reported their relationship with their child as very warm and close. In addition, 42 percent had parents who reported the relationship as “better than ever expected,” with only 15 percent reporting the relationship as “more difficult” than they expected.
http://www.america.gov/st/peopleplace-english/2009/December/200912171352251CJsamohT0.1063196.html
Tuesday, 22 December 2009
Consultation on DCSF charging for their services
What I should be doing right now is filling in the Consultation on the DCSF wanting to charge £1775 for their services for processing a Certificate of Eligibility - it's difficult though to keep a lid on my feelings.
Since when I ask do government departments start charging for their services? Is that not what we paid tax for??
Does the Defense Department charge families for bringing back the bodies of their loved ones? Why not? A dead soldier is no longer any use for the goverment and thus bringing back the body is solely 'in the interests of the family'. I don't mean to be flippant but according to the DCFS consultation this "charge is being introduced because it is a service for the prospective adopter, rather than the child, as the child is usually unknown at the application stage". Such double standards are being used. The whole emphasis on an inter-country adoption is in 'the best interests of the child' and here when it suits them it is suddenly 'in the interests of the parents'.
And here I would like to throw in the IVF card. IVF on NHS is a postcode lottery - but if you qualify and thousands do - then your treatment - to create an unknown child - is paid for to the tune of £7000.
Oh yes, the government will pay for you to bring a child into the world through medical science but will charge you for taking in one of the children already in the world who no one can look after. To me this makes no sense. No common sense and no 'green' sense either.
But the DCSF will put in the charge in September - it has been decided and there is no strong opposition. It will not improve their service and it will put off some prospective families. The result is that a child somewhere in this world, unknown, will not find a loving family, will grow up in an institution, and will be inadequately prepared for adult life. Well done DCSF, I hope you are proud of yourself.
Since when I ask do government departments start charging for their services? Is that not what we paid tax for??
Does the Defense Department charge families for bringing back the bodies of their loved ones? Why not? A dead soldier is no longer any use for the goverment and thus bringing back the body is solely 'in the interests of the family'. I don't mean to be flippant but according to the DCFS consultation this "charge is being introduced because it is a service for the prospective adopter, rather than the child, as the child is usually unknown at the application stage". Such double standards are being used. The whole emphasis on an inter-country adoption is in 'the best interests of the child' and here when it suits them it is suddenly 'in the interests of the parents'.
And here I would like to throw in the IVF card. IVF on NHS is a postcode lottery - but if you qualify and thousands do - then your treatment - to create an unknown child - is paid for to the tune of £7000.
Oh yes, the government will pay for you to bring a child into the world through medical science but will charge you for taking in one of the children already in the world who no one can look after. To me this makes no sense. No common sense and no 'green' sense either.
But the DCSF will put in the charge in September - it has been decided and there is no strong opposition. It will not improve their service and it will put off some prospective families. The result is that a child somewhere in this world, unknown, will not find a loving family, will grow up in an institution, and will be inadequately prepared for adult life. Well done DCSF, I hope you are proud of yourself.
Wednesday, 25 November 2009
Open Adoption
I have just listened to a fascinating Radio 4 programme about Open Adoption and not surprising there is now talk that open adoption and letter contact with birthparents may actually be detrimental to the child.
This is one reason why potential parents may choose inernational adoption over domestic adoption because the idea of open adoption does not really make sense.
Is it in the child's best interest to have contact with someone who has physically, mentally or sexually abused them, or who has neglected them? The reason why these children have been removed from their parents in the first place is because the parents could not care for them, so what positive outcome will there be to 'force' contact with these people.
They mentioned in the programme that open adoption was suppose to reveal a truth about the child's life so that hidden mistruths will not be created. But because most children who are adopted have trauma in their lives, from the hands of those very people who are suppose to care for them and who are responsible for them being in care, and the conventional wisdom is open adoption - mistruths are being created and the truth is being hidden, covered up and fabricated.
I welcome the lastest comments and I am glad that there will now be a look into the practice of open adoption and at least reveal that it is not always in the best interest of the child.
This is one reason why potential parents may choose inernational adoption over domestic adoption because the idea of open adoption does not really make sense.
Is it in the child's best interest to have contact with someone who has physically, mentally or sexually abused them, or who has neglected them? The reason why these children have been removed from their parents in the first place is because the parents could not care for them, so what positive outcome will there be to 'force' contact with these people.
They mentioned in the programme that open adoption was suppose to reveal a truth about the child's life so that hidden mistruths will not be created. But because most children who are adopted have trauma in their lives, from the hands of those very people who are suppose to care for them and who are responsible for them being in care, and the conventional wisdom is open adoption - mistruths are being created and the truth is being hidden, covered up and fabricated.
I welcome the lastest comments and I am glad that there will now be a look into the practice of open adoption and at least reveal that it is not always in the best interest of the child.
Thursday, 19 November 2009
Children-in-need a commodity?
It seems that there is nothing as controversial as intercountry adoption.
I have been in this world for over 8 years now - as an adoptive parent, creator of adoption support group, as advocate. I have read everything I can get my hands on, spoken to hundreds of adoptive parents and dozens of adoptees, attended lectures, organised conferences etc etc. and even now I am still discovering the subtleties of international adoption.
And I have spoken many times to the media - and this is what I find so interesting. 'Hello I wonder if you can help me - I have been asked to write this article about international adoption for Friday and I want to know....
And that is it 2 days of research and then these 'journalists' think that they know everything.
The most popular and again latest comment is that children in need are purely a commodity for desperate infertile and "Those who disagree, should ask themselves why they are not willing to give the money they would spend on that child to the community the child comes from. The impact on that child and many others in their community would be far greater than removing them from their community and adopting the child."
I love these rediculous, grand, ignorant statements. How much money I wonder will be equivalent to the loving and nurturing of a child? How much does it cost to take a child who has no future and give them a chance to have a normal life? Why is it always about money and never about love? I would like to see an article about international adoption that talks purely about love. The love it takes to relinquish a child, the love a child needs to give to make them human, the love an adult has to bring up someone else's child. Now that is a story.
I have been in this world for over 8 years now - as an adoptive parent, creator of adoption support group, as advocate. I have read everything I can get my hands on, spoken to hundreds of adoptive parents and dozens of adoptees, attended lectures, organised conferences etc etc. and even now I am still discovering the subtleties of international adoption.
And I have spoken many times to the media - and this is what I find so interesting. 'Hello I wonder if you can help me - I have been asked to write this article about international adoption for Friday and I want to know....
And that is it 2 days of research and then these 'journalists' think that they know everything.
The most popular and again latest comment is that children in need are purely a commodity for desperate infertile and "Those who disagree, should ask themselves why they are not willing to give the money they would spend on that child to the community the child comes from. The impact on that child and many others in their community would be far greater than removing them from their community and adopting the child."
I love these rediculous, grand, ignorant statements. How much money I wonder will be equivalent to the loving and nurturing of a child? How much does it cost to take a child who has no future and give them a chance to have a normal life? Why is it always about money and never about love? I would like to see an article about international adoption that talks purely about love. The love it takes to relinquish a child, the love a child needs to give to make them human, the love an adult has to bring up someone else's child. Now that is a story.
Monday, 28 September 2009
No children in the UK available for adoption
How many times have I heard prospective adoptive parents telling me that they have been told this? So many times. We don't have any children for you, we will not be able to match you with any children, there is no chance that we can find a child for you...
and yet the government no propose to spend £850000 arranging adoption parties because so many children are waiting in care for parents to come forward.
This last case today - can't or won't be matched because the couple is of two different races and there aren't any children that match their ethnic mix.
In todays world, in London the most multicultural city in the world - they would prefer to keep children in care then give them to a mixed race family.
This is institutional racism of the deepest kind and is costing the government thousands to keep them in care and the children the right to grow up in a loving and secure family environment. It is common sense children need families and there are families now who are available for these children but no for some outdate conventional wisdom it is not to be.
No one is disputing that there may be challenges to grow up in families where the parents do not look like you - but are they insurmountable? And the costs/challenges must be weighed up by a life time in care - we know what we would choose if we were a child given the option.
and yet the government no propose to spend £850000 arranging adoption parties because so many children are waiting in care for parents to come forward.
This last case today - can't or won't be matched because the couple is of two different races and there aren't any children that match their ethnic mix.
In todays world, in London the most multicultural city in the world - they would prefer to keep children in care then give them to a mixed race family.
This is institutional racism of the deepest kind and is costing the government thousands to keep them in care and the children the right to grow up in a loving and secure family environment. It is common sense children need families and there are families now who are available for these children but no for some outdate conventional wisdom it is not to be.
No one is disputing that there may be challenges to grow up in families where the parents do not look like you - but are they insurmountable? And the costs/challenges must be weighed up by a life time in care - we know what we would choose if we were a child given the option.
Friday, 25 September 2009
Horrific reports about Irish Institutions
Listening to Radio 4 at the moment and the horrific stories of children who were placed in the institutions in Ireland and the dreadful abuse that they suffered. The Ryan Report outlines events in details. It is a disgrace - the whole complex system that was privy to what was going on behind the doors of those institutions to those little children and who did nothing. I feel such moral outrage - not only for these Irish children but to the whole attitude in this country as to 'it is better to keep children in institutions' then adopt them out to loving and secure families.
I can't listen anymore to the report it is too disheartening - but hopefully it will awaken the heardness in the hearts of the anti-adoption debate.
I can't listen anymore to the report it is too disheartening - but hopefully it will awaken the heardness in the hearts of the anti-adoption debate.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
