# What to write......help!



## DRocks (Sep 13, 2013)

So we have been shown a number of profiles and two we are interested in, one in particular would like to express our interest in.
Need to email but no idea what to say


----------



## Mummy DIY Diva (Feb 18, 2012)

Is this for your sw to tell them to ask for more info or for the childs sw. If it's just for yours I'd just say felt really drawn to x can you ask for more information please.  If it's for the childs and going to be considered along with other adopters then I'd write as much as possible.  Why you are drawn to them why you'd be a great  parent for them how you can explain and celebrate their history etc. Good luck x


----------



## DRocks (Sep 13, 2013)

Thanks Ladies
It's for child's SW!
Heartfelt email sent so fingers x


----------



## Forgetmenot (Jun 22, 2010)

Good luck!


----------



## Hunibunni (Jan 18, 2009)

Good luck Disney xx


----------



## mollycat (Jan 14, 2007)

so excited for you Disney, i hope you get a reply from lo's sw soon....... xxx


----------



## DRocks (Sep 13, 2013)

She is linked, but we are back in the running for a 8 month pink that was linked and then it fell through. We expressed interest back in Dec


----------



## Waiting_patiently (Dec 4, 2013)

You guys are so lucky having the chance with lo's, our LA says won't get younger than 12 -18mths but I keep reading on here that lots of people have been linked with 7 mths upwards recently, I wonder if ours don't like to move them younger as they must get some   I really want to ask how others are getting them now a lot and we aren't being offered any, not that I've seen profiles yet but they've been adamant from the start that they don't have baby babies.


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

Hi WP,

This comes down to area mainly. I was like you and in our wider area it is rare to be linked to an LO under 11/12 months. Most babies appeared to be 14-18months. Our LO was 12 months when we found his basic details and 16months when he moved home.

My research concluded it seemed to be down to courts, Active SWs and internal policies. 

I would say once you have your LO the age doesn't matter much by the 6 months or so. You need to be guided by your SW regarding your agency, area and then wider National register. I think its dangerous to get too caught up in others' links as everything is unique to individuals ie we all have varying matching criteria and contact requirements.
Good luck


----------



## Waiting_patiently (Dec 4, 2013)

GERTIE179 said:


> Hi WP,
> 
> This comes down to area mainly. I was like you and in our wider area it is rare to be linked to an LO under 11/12 months. Most babies appeared to be 14-18months. Our LO was 12 months when we found his basic details and 16months when he moved home.
> 
> ...


Your right Gertie It just seems slightly disheartening as Im sure we'd all like more of the nurturing side as young as possible and to feel like there still a baby when we bring them home, either way we're happy to just be in the running to get a lo full stop, its just when reading that others seem to be having them placed so easily it does make you wonder why not yours x


----------



## GERTIE179 (Apr 20, 2005)

Well my 16 month old was happy to be babied (and needed it) for a lot longer than friends and not what you would typically expect. He's only now at 2.5yrs wanting to be more toddlery but mummy is still his favourite person to play with.

I know it seems tough but these thoughts won't help you (talking from experience) as we had a long wait too (and very open matching criteria). I would suggest its worth you having a frank conversation with your SW when your starting to look further afield.
X


----------



## Wyxie (Apr 10, 2013)

Waiting patiently, I would ask your SW as placing younger is much more common now.

I'm afraid I do have to disagree with Gertie (sorry).  I think those 6-8 months or so make a massive difference.  Although some toddlers will be babied, they still have their toddleryness as well.  They're into everything and you're saying no to everything.  Having a baby when they really do need to rely on you to do everything feels like a huge advantage to me.  I've had two children placed, one at 19 months and one at 10 months.  I'd be the first to admit our daughter's situation was fairly extreme, but even putting some of the additional difficulties aside, there is no way I could have had the same sort of easy opportunities in terms of bonding and building attachment with an 18 month old that I had with my 10 month old.  We were expecting our son at around 5-6 months initially, and even at 10 months I could see how those couple of months had made things so much harder for all of us.

You don't lose anything for asking why they don't have babies to place.  Our placing LA generally places babies taken into care at birth, around the 12 months mark, but they're available from 4 1/2 months a lot of the time, it's just that the LA is basically rubbish.  Our assessing LA normally places their babies around 6-7 months now and I know a number of adopters who've had children of this age placed.  At one point that LA was looking for outside adopters for their babies because they had more than they had adopters.  Perhaps you should ask your SW if looking further afield may get you the age you're looking for.  It might be that's not possible for whatever reason, but you won't know if you don't ask, and I think that may cause frustrations later on.

Disneyrocks, I really hope your possible link works out.  

Best wishes,

Wyxie xx


----------



## millie123 (Dec 16, 2010)

good luck exciting times


----------

