News

It never rains but it pours. Last month, the government published not one, but two sets of draft regulations aimed at shaking up the adoption system (news, page 8, 13 November).

The draft adoption agency regulations and the suitability of adopters regulations signal the government's plan to shift the balance of power from adoption professionals towards adoptive parents and children. Announcing the draft regulations, children's minister Margaret Hodge said it was the first time in 20 years that adoption law was being reviewed and she wanted to get it right: "I want to make the process fairer and friendlier for prospective parents."


It has been a busy time for the adoption sector. Just before the draft regulations were published, new adoption support regulations came into effect, as part of the Adoption and Children Act 2002. Under these, local authorities now have far wider responsibilities to adopters and adopted children. Councils are to provide some of them with a range of support services, advice and information, financial help and access to therapy.

A key proposal in the new round of regulations is for adoption agencies to provide prospective adopters with comprehensive information about the child they wish to adopt. This includes details about their behaviour, their educational history, their health, and the wishes of the child and, where appropriate, the child's parent or guardian.

Clearly, adopters will be better placed to meet a child's needs if they know their history. But there is a flipside to this, warns Wes Cuell, the Association of Directors of Social Services' lead on adoption and Luton Council's head of children and families services. There is always a risk that if agencies do provide additional information about a child, adopters will drop out of the process. But he says: "If this happens it is a good thing. We have got to get the right match between the carer and the child."

Cuell adds that some prospective adopters are so focused on adopting that they do not take in the full implications of taking on a difficult child. "We need to make sure the way we communicate information is improved so people hear and understand what they are being told."

A case involving Essex Council last year shows the need for sound communication. A couple proved in court that the council had failed to provide adequate information about a boy with behavioural problems they had adopted. The council was ordered to pay damages to the couple and the case has now gone to appeal. Mr Justice Buckley said: "Any suggestion that a prospective adopter should go ahead without the fullest information about the child in question would be untenable, at least as a general proposition."

So will stipulating that prospective adopters are given more information stop placements from breaking down? Not necessarily, says Deborah Cullen, secretary of Baaf Adoption and Fostering's legal group. "There is never a cast iron guarantee that a placement won't break down, as people don't know everything about a child. Some things may come out several years after an adoption has happened."

Andrew Hale, a university lecturer from Worcestershire, has first-hand experience of a placement breakdown. In the late 1980s he and his wife adopted two half-brothers, then aged two and five, who had been abused and neglected. The couple claim the former Hereford and Worcester Council failed to tell them the boys were likely to suffer attachment disorders as they grew up. Hale says even if they had been warned of this they would still have taken the boys. "There should be complete transparency and adopters should be given as much information as possible about the child and forewarned about any potential problems," he says.

Hale acknowledges there is a danger that if more information is passed on some children may be labelled as too difficult to manage and become impossible to place. For these children, he calls for different types of guardianship, such as long-term fostering with additional support from social services.


West Sussex Council family placement service development manager Peter Crawhurst says "telling the story, warts and all" will not exclude children with problems from adoption. "We can find parents who can take children on if we provide the necessary support."

Parents should also receive more consistent support, preparation and training from their adoption agency before they adopt, according to the draft regulations. Such a move is prompted by the inconsistent and often patchy pre-adoption support that exists across the sector.

Providing ongoing training for adopters is part of the answer, says Hale. He says parents should be trained in how to deal with children who have experienced abuse and may develop attachment disorder, or need help with anger management. Respite care is also necessary for adopters so they and their children can have a break, he adds.

Adopted children and their new parents should be helped to negotiate their way around the education and health systems, and receive practical support, such as therapy, says Cullen. "Some adopters feel they go to the bottom of the waiting list along with everyone else asking for help."

Alongside the draft regulations, the government also announced plans to establish independent review panels for prospective adopters who are rejected by an adoption agency. The panels will review the information on which the original adoption panel based its decision. Baaf Adoption and Fostering has won the contract to run the panels for three years, which will become operational in April next year.

There is a risk that people turned away by an agency will still be rebuffed by the new panels. But at least they should give prospective adopters more confidence in the system. "They will know that it's not just one agency acting in a idiosyncratic way," says Cullen. Individuals should never go away from a panel being told "they are no good or are deficient", she adds.

However, Crawhurst doubts whether the independent review panel will really receive that many challenges from disgruntled rejected adopters. "The impact will be miniscule. From my experience adoption panels and agencies aren't turning down people unnecessarily."

Taking children's views about adoption into account is another suggestion made by the draft regulations. It is increasingly common for children who are old enough to be asked their views as this makes the placement less likely to break down.

If children are to be more involved, says Crawhurst, although their feelings must be taken into account they should not override the decision-making process. "Decisions are made in the courts, by professionals and the child's parents, that are in their best interests. They may not be able to reconcile the decision with their conflicting emotions." 

- The draft regulations are available from www.doh.gov.uk/adoption. Consultation ends in May 2004.