# I keep being told to be honest with myself



## EverHopefulmum (Sep 23, 2009)

Through out my training courses we kept being told to be realistic about the age of the child we said we wanted for adoption because there we no babies they told us most children in the system we 2 or older due to the time it takes to go through court proceedings etc.....we are now on home study and said to the sw that we would go for a 0-3 year old. She told us she has it in her head that we should go as young as possible but i need to be honest with myself & her about what age i want. 


It's not about being honest, i was trying to be realistic as previously asked. I never dared to dream i could get a baby, in fact i was made to feel guilty for even thinking about it. So over the last 6 months have been telling myself that we would probably get a child between 2 and 3 years old. Now i feel she has completely confused the issue and i'm worried on some level its a test to see if i have come to terms with not having a baby. Worried if i now change my mind she will either think i don't know what i want or that i still have issues i need to resolve!


Anybody had a similar experience or advise?


----------



## Emma-is-a-mummy (Jan 16, 2012)

Hiya,

Sorry your Sw has confused the issue they do tell you there are no babies in the system but that's not true my little one was 10 months when we brought him home and I know quite a few people who have been linked, matched and placed with children under 18 months. 

I agree with the be totally honest with yourself and Sw about the age because we said we'd consider 0-3 but in reality we want under 18 months so in the end our Sw wouldn't show us any profiles of lo's over 18 months. 

If you want to do baby stuff then you really want as young as possible and stick to it you may have to wait slightly longer but it is totally worth the wait I promise  

Hope this helps? 

Good luck with your journey. 

Hugs xxxxx


----------



## peacelily (Feb 24, 2006)

Not got time for a longer response, but...we have adopted twice and had a tiny baby and a 9mth baby (second time we were similar ages to you and your partner). First time our age range was 0-3yrs, second time 0-18mths. There are a lot of young children in the system! Babies tend to be 8mths+ because of the time of Court proceedings...but that's very much still a baby.


Good luck!


Peacelily xx


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

Hi Ever,

Tbh it's quite normal in my opinion to explore during home study. It's true there are less babies (I know there's a lot of folks on here who've had younger babies placed but I feel this isn't as true a picture across the country). In our consortium of 8-12 LAs it seems under 16months is very rare due to the court processes etc. I knew I wanted to feel id babied a child and whilst I knew we would miss milestones, I wanted to feel my child was a baby when LO came home. Thus when we started looking at profiles I felt drawn to younger ones (we wanted a sibling group originally but again there weren't too many of these in our area as SWs had been good at getting children placed earlier - separately in some cases. So we did stipulate we wanted a child under 18months, (we were approved for 1-2 upto 4yrs old) and this did reduce the profiles available unfortunately.

So we waited (12 months) and had a date when we would reevaluate our threshold and luckily found our LO just before this cut off date. However our LO was found by us and from out of area and we accepted more uncertainty and combined history/issues than we originally had thought as we felt he was the right one.

I think your SW is asking you to be honest as how would you really feel having a 3yr toddler who comes walking/talking and their own opinions etc rather than an 10-14 month old who's just starting to talk/walk etc? And if the latter are you prepared to wait if need be?

Once you have given this more thought, then you can draw out more specifics and realistic scenarios with your SW. A friend of mine adopted a 2.4years child and whilst they love their child, they are already talking about going for 14months and under when they adopt again as my friend now feels she wants some of the baby stages that we had. (They had waited over a year for the match).

Your SW is correct in that point that sometimes true feelings don't surface until you have a LO home.
HTH you with your decisions.
X


----------



## snapdragon (Jun 27, 2011)

We wanted a slightly older child due to our ages, I was 44 shortly after lo was placed. We wanted a child around 3 if possible and were approved for 2.5 -5. Lo was 22 months when placed so younger than we intended but he was the right child for us. Our la said similar things to us. On one of our training days they said currently we have no under twos. But that is because when they become available they usually have adopters waiting. Our lo had a placement order for 4 months when we were approved and they couldn't find a home for him as their approved adopters wanted younger children.  Two friends I met through prep were both  matched with 9 month olds and another with siblings 12 months and 26 months. If you want as young as possible that's what you should say.


----------



## MummyElf (Apr 11, 2013)

We were told the reason they often say there are no babies is to effectively sort the wheat from the chaff, as there are people who just want to adopt a baby because they want a baby, and I guess they're trying to ensure they don't get lots of infertility rebounds because the issues that come with adoption can be so tough, even with babies. I think they try to ward off the people who fall in love with the idea of adopting a baby without really thinking it through. We were told everyone wants a baby girl and to write it off as they're rare. My niece was placed at 4 months (albeit with an older sibling). We conversely wanted two boys aged 2-3 years .... I didn't think we'd get a baby, even though I'm under 30. Our SW talked us down to one child, as young as possible. 

We were matched with a baby girl who came to us at 11 months and are soon to have her sibling who will be under 6 months when placed.

I definitely think honesty is the best policy, they want the best for you and if it's one under 18 months or 12 months, you may have to wait a bit (we did) but it will happen. On the other hand many people want an older child, one couple we know have adopted a 5 year old, and another a 7 year old, and some of the people on our prep course wanted a child of school age whilst others wanted toddlers / babies. I thought there would be a mad scramble for the under ones, but actually, people who don't want a long career break and adopt may feel better suited to a child of school age.

Good luck


----------



## MummyPea (Jun 11, 2012)

Hi!

Most definitely be honest with yourselves and with the SW. But also think about why you want a very young child... For us it wasn't about wanting a baby, it's purely because the youngest person in our family (and the only child) is our nephew who is 1. So we really wanted a child around his age, either younger or older up to a year. 

We told panel this and they recommended us for 0-2. We've been linked with a 10 month old blue who will be 1 by the time he is home (still waiting for everything to be confirmed so trying not to get to excited!)

Good luck xx


----------



## Flash123 (Jan 29, 2006)

We were approved for 0-2 although we never in our oldest dreams expected to be be linked or matched with a lo at the younger age of that range. We would have loved it but like you came to expect an older lo due to what we had heard. However, on our first ever hs we hadn't discussed ages and our sw said she could see us with a lo as young as possible. We were thrilled but didn't think anymore about it. Amazingly, We were then linked to a 5 month old. He should have been home at 6 months but delays meant he came home aged 8 months. Although he was the first and only profile we looked at, During this delay period, our sw had 5 or 6 other profiles she wanted us to look at, all under 8 months. 

Changes to the system have meant that lo are getting placement orders far younger and sadly, there are way more lo of all ages, needing forever families than there are forever families wanting lo's. 

Adoption can be tough enough anyway but I agree that honesty is key. Xx


----------



## thespouses (Jan 5, 2006)

All the LAs we've spoken to about a second adoption said they never stop taking on adopters interested in any age - and we said under 1 due to little boy's age and his age when placed. But they may be confident we have done babies already and know it's not all roses, due to his age when placed!


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Tell them what you want, you can always widen the age range and any other criteria later on if a match isn't found in a reasonable amount of time.  Babies are almost never "available" as such, because there are usually people waiting, but there are a lot of babies coming through at the moment.  Court cases can be concluded in as little as 4 1/2 months now, on the new Court timetables.  Placement of these babies seems to be happening anywhere between 6 and 12 months, depending on how good the LA involved are.  Social Services want to steer people towards older children where possible, because of course these children are harder to place and most babies will be placed very quickly.

All the best,

Wyxie xx


----------



## mummy2blossom (Feb 21, 2013)

Hi, I just thought I'd pop on here to say we are in a similar situation.  We are yet to discuss this in great detail with our SW but it is something I'm very worried about.  We are hoping for as young as possible but are aware they are rare, I'm terrified our SW will think this negative. Hubby thinks we should stick to our guns and say 0-12months but I'm thinking 0-18months as it is slightly wider. 

I do believe we should be honest though and not just say something to keep SW happy, I suppose we need to find a happy medium!

Good luck


----------



## EverHopefulmum (Sep 23, 2009)

Big thanks everyone for coming back to me on this. Sounds encouraging that there seem to be alot of young ones in the system at the moment.


I haven't been able to sleep properly for days as I can't stop thinking about this. Me and hubby are definitely going to lower our age range from initial 0-3 years but can't decide what we should say, he thinks 0-18months but i'm thinking 0-24months. We would love as young as possible, but after 7 years on this journey we don't want to have to wait years to get a match....I guess its another conversation we need to have with SW at our next visit to see what she thinks.


Thanks again. x


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

Hi Ever,

I would be honest in that you see you with a baby as young as possible and what SW realistically sees in your area. Your happy with the 0-2 or 0-3 range for panel. Say you've been in touch with some adopters and you are hearing with the changes there seems to be more young ones coming through but you are aware that this could be area or conditions that you've not covered yet. I was told if e wanted a 3/4yr old we could be matched within a few months hence DH and I knew we were willing to accept a wait up to a point (we've been on a long road for 10yrs ) and we always said the right LO was important. I even read a profile if a 3yr old that I fell for but the children's SW was off sick and no one would come back to us and we ended up being linked n match with our gorgeous boy.

Personally I found the folks on here getting young matches hard going as it just wasnt true in our area & consortium (but it does happen just more rare). I was happy people were finding their families but just got caught in bad thoughts cycle (like a postcode lottery of IVF funding I suppose) I was in a low place as we'd waited a long time after being told we'd be snapped up quickly. I'm not saying this for anything other than prepare yourself as I truly thought this was uk wide and mentally it was hard to get myself into reading the profiles properly and I had to give myself a good talking to - what was more  a "baby" or my LO who was out there waiting for us.
Good luck


----------



## snapdragon (Jun 27, 2011)

In a lot of respects it doesn't matter too much what you are approved for but that your sw knows what you want. We were approved at panel for 2.5-5 but when my sw came to see us (we got a new sw after approval panel) she said I know you are approved for this age range but what do you really want. We said around 3 so that is what she looked for. As I said earlier we did end up with a 22 month old as we had a couple of links not work out with 3 year olds. Being approved for 0-2 might be good to keep your options open and might be better for panel and as long as your sw knows you want as young as possible it really shouldnt make any difference.


----------



## Macgyver (Oct 27, 2008)

We went to what they call coffee mornings, where you can see lots of profiles of children.  We were told that there were not many babies in the system and not to get our hearts upset if we had to wait.  We made the decision 0-3 yrs.  but at these coffee mornings we were so surprised how many babies (8mths) upwards there were.
Our little man was 7 months when we saw his profile and 10 months when we brought him home.  


Be honest and if you are prepared to wait your lo will come along.


----------



## -x-Lolly-x- (Feb 3, 2012)

We were approved 0-3 and were shown 13 profiles   all were under 2 years old


----------



## keemjay (Jan 19, 2004)

snapdragon said:


> In a lot of respects it doesn't matter too much what you are approved for but that your sw knows what you want..


I'd agree with that..we were approved for 1 or 2 under 5 but our sw knew we wanted under 2 and poss alot younger..I wanted to have as much pre-school time as possible with them..

but i also said that it was very very hard to pinpoint exactly what we did want because i truly believed (and still do) that our child or children would find us when the time was right.... and how on earth was i meant to know how that child/children would be at that point? I just knew we would find eachother. ...and we did!

kj x


----------



## Flash123 (Jan 29, 2006)

I agree completely keemjay. Something's are just meant to be. Little man found us, he was meant to be ours I just needed someone else to give birth to him xxx


----------

