« Annoying People of The Week - 20 June | This Mornings Observations... »
@ 2008-06-21 – 07:37:22
Anyone else think that this sounds a bit racist?! Probably not, as I'm hoping they did not actually intend to come across as racist.
But surely what a child needs is a loving parent(s), who are willing to devote their time to bring them up. Does it matter then, what skin colour they are?!
happy28
Pro 
rithompson
I would have thought that the most important consideration would be a loving family, regardless of race. But maybe I just don't understand the process of adoption. 
Got your message, thanks - though you have probably seen the reply now!
No it's not racist.
There are two problems here. Firstly the lack of adoptive parents because of the rules of adoption. The laws have changed so much that people are now longer willing to adopt because, in many cases, rather than adopting people are being lifelong baby sitters.
Secondly, with regard to the matching, children have a hard enough time coming into the care system (even babies) and placing within a ethnically matching family is a priority not just at infancy but at any age. Would a white person understand and be able to empathise with some of the problems black people have with their hair? This could be a silly example if you didn't know that black people do have issues with hair now and again, and not just the way white people do.
The article fails to explain that when a child comes on to the adoption circuit (a crude way of saying but true all the same) there is already four or five couples lined up for that child. If a black child comes into the care system and there is a black couple who have //just// made an enquiry to be adoptive carers then the adoption of that baby will be put on hold while their application is assess and approved or rejected. The baby/infant/child will go into foster care and be with a loving family until the adoption is sorted out.
At the end of the day the thoughts are for the child even if some people thinks it's cruel. If I was a social worker I'd happily have a baby in foster care for an extra year if it meant I could find the perfect matched family for them.
a loving 'white' family is acceptable for fostering but not long term care WHY?
A loving white family is acceptable for long term care, it would just be better for the child's growth and knowledge of it's culture if a black child is placed with black family. If no family is suitable for adoption, and sadly it happens, then the child will be placed in any available foster placement.
So, I'm curious now, would you attempt to place for example, a Nigerian baby with a Nigerian family? Or would any family of African descent do?
How are mixed race babies placed?
And if you have an Irish baby would it be wrong to place it with a Scottish family? Where do the boundaries lie?
Okay first off lets separate adoption and fostering as the matching system, although it has it's similarities, is very different.
Lets look at fostering first. With fostering it is assumed that a child will be going home as the ethos with all councils now is plan for the return so when a child is placed with a foster carers they are already working towards the end. Each council has a portfolio of each of it's carers which states not only the "type" (horrible word) of children they'll look after but also the children they've already fostered. It is an extensive list. It's a 32 page form that takes 16 hours to fill in. So, a child comes into the care system. The first thing that is considered is the age and the background. If the this is a baby and there is no way the child can go home then it goes to specific carers who deal with babies who are up for adoption. If there is a chance the child can go home then again the baby goes with carers who take babies. Together with the family they work towards getting the child home. Lets say the family are catholic and want the child raised that way. Then the baby will go to carers who practice Catholicism or who are willing to raise the child that way. This would be the same for all religions, backgrounds, culture... everything. As a foster carer you accept the child is not yours and you raise the child the way the parents want... within reason. For example as a foster carer you must uphold the child's right to smoke if they wish but you do not have to support them by buying the cigarettes or letting them smoke in your home or even in your presence. You can also tell the child you are not happy with them smoking but you cannot stop them. Should the parents want the child to stop you can again only encourage the child not to smoke but you cannot stop them. Smoking is just one example, there are many others from haircuts to using a gym.
Now as I said with fostering you are always working towards the child going home. With adoption the child is going to a new home so the matching is more strict. With fostering matching is a nicety that isn't always possible. With adoption is a necessity that must happen to as a fine a line as possible. So yes a Nigerian baby would be placed with a Nigerian family. If there are no Nigerian families looking to foster then the closest match is found. Three couples are always found for one child. Paperwork is drawn up and each case goes to court and a panel of judges decide the final outcome.
There are no boundaries, only ideals. If, at the time, only all white families were looking to adopt, then the family that could give the child the best life would gain custody. An Irish baby would be placed with a Scottish family. A white baby would be placed with black family.
Adoption can take up to two years because the social services want to get it right. Sadly less and less people are applying because the rules are changing that make adoption more like fostering and less like having your own child.
If I've not explained it well enough or you have any further questions please feel free to ask. I'm more than happy to answer.
it's an interesting area that I'd never really considered before, (Sorry Ros, taking over your blog here!), I find it hard to understand why the process takes so long, but I guess it has to be thorough coz you'll always have critics, but it also seems laughable because nowhere near this amount of thought is put when people start a family so it almost seems OTT the lengths you have to go to!
thanks for explaining though.
You're quite right, things are OTT. Very much so!
When we applied to be foster carers we had to jump through so many hoops yet, as you say, anyone can start a family without proving anything.
mayhaps that's where the government should start next? no, i sound like a nazi now! G'ah!
Brad things they should put something in the water to stop pregnancy and then you have to apply for a tablet to stop the effects of the water!
How very George Orwell!
rithompson
Hehe. Imagine, a high enough dose of the contraceptive pill in the water...! 
The Vatican would have something to say about that though, but just let them!
Back to an earlier point, would all the regulations exist because the adoption people are trying to cover their own backsides?
Some of the regulations are there to cover the backsides of the authorities yes, but some are also there to cover the backsides of the adoptive parents and the child itself.
Sadly the regulations are changing that much that people don't want to adopt any more.
rithompson
That's a shame, and there's loads of children just waiting to be adopted! 
rithompson
Don't mind you taking over. Make yourselves at home - I was sitting back and watching the debate! 
rithompson
Interesting argument. But would it be so humbling for a white person to learn about different peoples hair? 
my mum managed on my hair just fine, isn't what he said (unintentionally I'm sure) as bad as saying white people shouldn't have kids with black people because they'll have to learn to deal with hair?
and again, how is adoption any different to any other couple having a mixed race/ethnic baby and the parent with the 'ethnic know-how' scarpering/splitting up?
Then you've also got the families who know nothing about British/English culture but successfully bring up kids - the ethnicity shouldn't be an issue. A child will grow up happy knowing/not knowing their ethnicity as long as they are loved!
x
rithompson
1. Saying that about "mixed" marriages is taking a step backwards by about 40 years. And, goodness knows we don't want that!
Is your hair particularly difficult?
Absolutely agree on the loving parents part!
The content of this website belongs to a private person, blog.co.uk is not responsible for the content of this website.
hmmm, intereseting, lots of thoughts come to mind here.
I think the first issue should be to get kids into a loving family, regardless of colour, but then that family should be given support if later there is a 'race' issue.
think I've wondered from the point, so I'm gonna PM you this.
hugs
x