# what is the Youngest people have adopted!!!



## ma1978 (May 30, 2009)

I know this might sound weird but what is the youngest age people have adopted eg age of adopted child?
As just want to get a idea really?  xx


----------



## oliver222 (Oct 8, 2009)

I know someone who adopted a newborn who was relinquished. Also have a friend who adopted a 7 month old. But that isnt too common. Our la told us that their average age is 18 months. Under a year is not so common.


----------



## aaa is a MUMMY (Oct 13, 2009)

Bubba was 1 year and 2 weeks when we met her. She should have been home 3 months earlier but sadly FIL passed  away so we had to have a break. Another couple on our prep also had lo same age.


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Babies are coming through a bit earlier now that the Court proceedings are a little shorter.  It's possible now for a placement order to be made in straightforward cases at around 4-5 months of age.  I'm aware of a few babies being placed with our assessing LA at around 7 months.  It varies from area to area.  Some LAs are very slow to place.  Our daughter's brother, placed by a different LA, had a placement order made at 4 1/2 months and at one point we were told he would be placed around 12-13 months old.  That has since been reduced to 10 1/2 months.


----------



## Flash123 (Jan 29, 2006)

Our little one will have just turned 8 months and we were matched at 5 months. Matching panel was planned for the next month but we've  had delays. If he wasn't the right match our la had several other lo's all under 6 months. At adoption panel there were 2 other couples being matched. Each was for a lo around 6 months. It's getting far more common now and our la said it would have been no problem at all having a lo approx 12 months .


----------



## thespouses (Jan 5, 2006)

There are also now more newborns that are placed thorough concurrent care, though not in all areas.

I met a lovely family locally whose son was placed at 7 1/2 months, and I think that's not too uncommon in our LA now, though it used to be unheard of.


----------



## ma1978 (May 30, 2009)

Hi Guys 
what does relinquished mean and concurrent mean as unsure? x x


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Relinquished is a baby given up for adoption. This is very rare, especially with white babies.

Concurrent care is fostering with the hope of adopting. When the child is removed from the birth family they would be placed with you as a foster child. _If_ they Court decides that they should be placed for adoption the intention would then be for you to adopt them. The Court could also decide that the child could be returned to birth family however, so you have to accept the possibility that the child could be removed again with little warning if either the birth parents or another family member is decided to be able to provide "adequate" parenting for that child. The child would have contact with their birth family while you were fostering which would gradually cease if the decision was made for you to adopt them.


----------



## Dreams do come true (Jan 4, 2012)

Ours were 4months and 18 months when linked, 10 mths and 2 years when home x x


----------



## Doubleprincesstrouble (Jan 28, 2013)

Hiya,

We adopted a 2 and 3 yr old, but that was by choice. We were actually looking for 3yrs+


----------



## Belliboo (Dec 23, 2007)

Our LO was 17months when he came home, we are in process for our second child & we have been told things are much quicker in the courts for LOs now & it has been known for children as young as 5 months coming up within our area xxx


----------



## katie c (Jun 15, 2009)

we had been linked to (although not formally matched with yet) a seven month old, admittedly due to much social services fannying around some very very necessary and important parts of the adoption process, he's now nine months.

the earliest we're likely to meet him will be eleven months. (if all goes to plan  )

still younger than we anticipated though, when we started the process, they told us babies were a rarity.


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

katie c said:


> we had been linked to (although not formally matched with yet) a seven month old, admittedly due to much social services fannying around some very very necessary and important parts of the adoption process, he's now nine months.
> 
> the earliest we're likely to meet him will be eleven months. (if all goes to plan  )
> 
> still younger than we anticipated though, when we started the process, they told us babies were a rarity.


But still very frustrating when you know a child's waiting and how much difference those few months make.


----------



## katie c (Jun 15, 2009)

Wyxie said:


> katie c said:
> 
> 
> > we had been linked to (although not formally matched with yet) a seven month old, admittedly due to much social services fannying around some very very necessary and important parts of the adoption process, he's now nine months.
> ...


very. missing so much of his development 

but hey ho. hopefully we will have him forever after all this wait, and it will become less important


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

I keep saying that to myself about our daughter's brother.  Our daughter we waited 5 1/2 months for from when we were first linked, it was completely needless and the whole time she was in a dreadful foster placement.  It still makes me so angry and upset to think about the needless damage that was done during that time.  

We had hoped to have her brother placed at around 5 or 6 months as we were linked with him before he was even born and led to believe that as soon as the placement order was made things would be going straight ahead, barring anything terrible happening.  In the end it will have taken 6 months from the placement order to us meeting him if everything works out.  I just can't help wondering how much difference that 6 months will make in how easily he attaches to us and what problems he will have going forwards.  The difference a few months makes for these babies can be so much.  

I want to be more fatalistic about it and just get on with things, but I can't help silently raging against the extra, unnecessary time my children aren't with me.

I hope that things work out and you have your little boy home soon, and as smoothly as possible.

Wyxie xx


----------



## snapdragon (Jun 27, 2011)

Our lo was 22 months but we were looking for 3 years plus. A friend we met through training bought home a 9 month old this week.


----------



## kizzi79 (Jan 9, 2009)

If all goes well at panel on june 12th my little one will be 10 months old when he comes home. We were linked when he was 7 months old. Like the others have said though generally rare now there are more younger babies coming through with focus on speeding up the process for children.
Good luck, love kiz  xx


----------



## KJB1978 (Nov 23, 2010)

KatieC - you could not have put that any better if you tried, made me laugh out loud and scare my little boy - thanks x

Our little boy was 5 months when matched and was supposed to be home at 7 months but the SWs lost a bit of paper with blood test results on so got delayed over Christmas and he was 10 months when we finally met him.  It was the most infuriating few months of delays and upset.... grrrr!!!

Everyone else from our prep course got children closer to 2 years old.


----------



## MummyElf (Apr 11, 2013)

All being well our LO will be almost one when she is placed with us x


----------

