# Willing to accept



## somedaysoon (Mar 7, 2013)

Our sw gave us some pen pictures to look at during our last session. We were to list the needs of each child and say whether or not we would be willing to accept each child,  were unsure or wouldn't accept. The cases were very difficult ones. Most had foetal alcohol syndrome or were at risk of some other form of quite severe learning difficulty. To be honest we would find it difficult to accept a child with many needs like this. I feel awful knowing these children need a home too but just know what we would be capable of. Now I am worried that all children in the care system have vety complex needs like this, and if we are being unrealistic. What are your experiences of what you were able or unable to accept? Are we being unrealistic in saying we would not accept a child with global developmental delay?


----------



## NancyS (Oct 16, 2013)

Nearly all children in the care system will potentially have some problems - and most children have been removed by from their birth parents due to neglect and a family history of drugs/alcohol, mental health problems or learning disabilities.  I would guess that the many birth mothers have taken drugs or drunk alcohol during pregnancy - although not all will admit to this and it may never appear in their reports.  

There are huge amounts of uncertainty with adoption - if you adopt an older child you will have some idea of the possible needs of the child, although there are likely to be attachment problems.  If you adopt a baby, there may not be any indication of possible future problems and lots of young children will be meeting all milestones - however, they may still be at risk of a genetic susceptibility to mental health problems or learning disabilities or showing effects of birth mother drinking in pregnancy.  I do think you have to be prepared for the worst case scenario as well as hoping for the best - as if you adopt a young child it is really difficult to know what the future will hold.


----------



## snapdragon (Jun 27, 2011)

I think there is always a level of uncertainty. My lo, home a year, has a genetic risk of Aspergers, though at nearly 3 shows no signs, but it is a possibility I have to accept. I made a couple of friends during prep. One has adopted 2 children probably as straight forward as you could get, just a very young mum who couldn't cope and the other a lo with a history of mental health issues in the family. I know that none of us would have said yes to a lo with fas or global developmental delay. However, you do have to accept a level of uncertainty with any child. For example bm could have been drinking while pregnant but sw's were not aware.


----------



## MummyAuntieKatie (Oct 18, 2012)

Any child, even birth children have a degree of uncertainty.  We were very clear about what we would and wouldn't accept and most of what we would fell in the mild end of the scale, i.e. visual impairment, yes we would accept a child with glasses but not one who was totally blind, physical deformities, we said yes to things like a missing finger or toe but no to a child requiring a wheelchair for severe disabilities etc.  Having said that, you never know what the future holds.  BB has no obvious issues, he is healthy and as far as we know a very normal 2 year old.  He went through drug withdrawal at birth which could cause problems but he shows no signs of ADHD or other problems of that nature.  I think we have been lucky but I do think there are lots of children out there who were removed early enough to have escapes major problems (apart from those that you may always find in adopted kids, attachment difficulties etc).  

I've said before that when we rehome dogs (I was involved in dog rehoming for a few years) we wanted potential adopters to be 100% honest about what they could cope with because otherwise there is a real danger that the dog would be returned as unsuitable and that isn't good for anyone concerned.  That or the family would persevere with a dog that didn't fit and everyone would be unhappy.  It does no one any favours not to be realistic about your expectations and it's not something to be ashamed about.  Be honest and hold out for what you know will work for you all.  

Be kind to yourself, adoption is already a big deal, don't be guilted into anything you aren't comfortable with xx


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Somedaysoon, we wouldn't have accepted any of those children either, but there will always be some degree of uncertainty.  There's a big difference between a b/m suspected to have drunk in pregnancy, than a child with a strong chance of or with known FAS.  We said we'd consider children where parents had drunk or taken drugs in pregnancy, but not a child with diagnosed FAS or strongly suspected.  The reason we gave is that FASD is a spectrum, and while we'd consider a child with a risk of it, any child who'd been diagnosed in the age group we were considering was going to fall at the more severe end of the spectrum, because it's hard to detect in young children.

Likewise, we said we'd consider a child with birth parents who had mental health issues or learning difficulties in the family (both our children have some family members with learning difficulties) but not where birth parents had serious learning disabilities or where there was a mental health condition that there was a strong risk of a child inheriting.  For a lot of mental health conditions, children of parents with that condition only have a slightly raised risk of developing the condition, and there are significant environmental factors, as well as a possible genetic pre-disposition.

We too were showed profiles before panel and asked which we'd consider.  We said none of them, because while we accepted risks would always be there, we weren't willing to sign up for a big list of known problems, plus all the potential risks.  We felt like we were being pushed towards children with more issues than we wanted to take on.  We refused to consider the process as a question of "what could we cope with" because we felt that set the bar too low.  We didn't want to end up with what we could cope with, we just needed to know that we felt we could cope with the worst case scenario if that did play out.  What we looked at was what we hoped for in our family, realistically I think, and whether the children would be likely to fit with that.  I would suggest you discuss your concerns with your SW and ask what they think the likelihood of a match with a child who "fits" is.

All the best,

Wyxie xx


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

Hi Someday,

Great advice and experiences given already. Ours is very similar and whilst we were open to a lot of things like mental health issues and disabilities, we were clear like Wxyie that FASD being diagnosed or suspected given our age range was a no no. And whilst we were open to a lot we did say not together ie A LO who has had a large exposure to drug use and potential for mental health problems but the genetic risk of learning disorders are low would have been ok for us.

It's crucial to be honest to yourself and I would also echo the others in that once your LO is yours if the what it's materialise then it's just your child and you will walk over not goals for them. So the "could cope" with does need to be realistic as well as your expectations. I hope this makes sense.

Good luck - the process is just not easy and this bit really shakes your morale core.
X x


----------



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

I don't think you're being unrealistic, I think good for you for being honest with yourselves on what you could cope with. As others have said we also would have said no to such difficulties. Our little pink was considered a straightforward child to place but of course her age means that the greatest risk we took was the uncertainty. Looking at the full picture we feel a lot of birth family difficulties were the result of environmental factors, however it's a gamble and sadly that's often the way with adoption. Equally we have had to trust the reports and accounts given by social workers, but only birth parents know the full truth. It's all a risk, just try and take as informed one as possible. And stay true to yourselves


----------



## claudia6662 (Aug 29, 2013)

Can I ask , when it comes to the stage of going through the different types of children needs you would be able to accept, does race or gender  come into this too? 

Me and DP are in a dual heritage relationship and SW said that if we got to the stage of panel and was accepted it wouldnt be long after that we would be matched.


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Claudia, yes.


----------



## claudia6662 (Aug 29, 2013)

thanks Wyxie, dont know whether that sounded like a thick question or not lol


----------



## somedaysoon (Mar 7, 2013)

Thanks so much everyone. I couldn't ask for any better advice! I showed your replies to my DH and we've just had a good chat about it all, being honest about what we could deal with. I think I will ask sw a bit more about the needs of the children who have previously been referred to them. I feel a bit better about saying we couldn't cope with a child with an outright diagnosis of fas. Then again, it will be a baby that we hope to adopt, so we will just have to accept all the uncertainties. 

Claudia, one of the profiles we were shown was of a child with mixed ethnicity. We were asked about this and how we felt about our chikd being a different race, how we would celebrate their culture, religion etc.

Thanks again everyone. I really appreciate all your experience!


----------



## NancyS (Oct 16, 2013)

Just to add that children with a definite diagnosis of FAS or global delay will usually be considered difficult to place - and social workers will often have to family find out of county. The children will likely come with an adoption allowance and care package as their needs will be more obvious. Most people I know have adopted children with no definite diagnosis and who are mainly meeting milestones, or with some speech delay, but no obvious other concerns. It's difficult to know what the future will hold, either because of genetic susceptibility or the effects of early trauma - and it may not be until school age or later that problems become apparent.  I think we all live with some uncertainty in adoption world, however, I would have found said no to a definite diagnosis of FAS or global delay


----------



## AoC (Oct 28, 2008)

Hang on in there, somedaysoon, it's really daunting at the 'matching considerations' stage, and it's really hard to say what you feel.  Our son was born withdrawing, but very mildly and I can see some of that fallout in him sometimes, but on other days I'll just think, "eh, he's a stubborn, independent, strong willed toddler with lots of energy - what's wrong with that?"    It's normal for adopted children to be a bit behind their peers at placement, a bit developmentally delayed.  It's also very common that they come on leaps and bounds when they're secure in their placement, and often catch up.  Bug has been like that.

We said no to severe physical disabilities, because our house is old, with lots of two-up-here and three-down-there uneven steps, and we're in a very rural area with limited services and no pavements!  We said no to severe and ongoing health problems, because we live a long way from specialist hospitals, and although I'm pretty good at navigating the NHS, when our SW asked me if that's what I wanted out of parenting, I realised the answer was no.  We said we thought we could best meet the needs of a child with a similar cultural heritage.  We wanted to avoid a child with a family history of allergies, because we have cats, the house is old with all the allergens that brings, and we back on to a farmyard.  (That's one for the chalk-it-up-to-experience board - SW swore there were no history of allergies, birth family member then, months later, said the family is rife with them.  So far so good for Bug, though!)  We were keen to deal with mild developmental delay, and I thought I could probably offer a lot to a child with speech delay.  We were prepared to help a child overcome a history of neglect and abuse, and ready to answer the call for a child with really difficult family history.

Whatever some SWers say about it being "all about the child"  (our SWer always maintained it was about both the child and us) you are allowed to reach for happiness in this, you're allowed to think about meeting your needs, too.  It's not about what you can 'cope with' it's about which child you could best meet the needs of, and which child could best meet your needs, too.


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

AoC  - another moment when I need a like or thumbs up button to your post x


----------



## AoC (Oct 28, 2008)

Thank you.  I'm only repeating what I've learned here, and through the process with FF support.


----------



## Hunibunni (Jan 18, 2009)

Great advice on this thread. Me and DH are both near the stage of stating our preferences too.  It's so hard but you have to be true to yourself what you can and can't cope with. 

Xx


----------

