Don't you just love it when a radio programme grips you. Last night there was a scrumptious double helping. Radio 4 served an hour of stimulating broadcasting offering two different perspectives of the impact of loss and attachment. Certainly worth this months license fee.

Bringing Up Britain focused on changes in adoption practices: 44 minutes with a sensible balanced discussion about wide ranging adoption issues shooting down some of the old myths with good research and some real experts. It also compared and contrasted adoption today with the 1980's. A brilliant resource for adopters (prospective or existing) to share with family and friends as a tool for enlightenment answering some "why we have to parent differently" questions.

The BBC web site says "Mariella Frostrup and guests discuss adoption. Both its immediate challenges and wider issues from passing the selection process, nurturing traumatised children and dealing with biological parents to the question of mixed race adoption and the dilemmas of keeping siblings together when they might be better apart.

But as well as having specific challenges adoption also presents universal issues of authority, communication transparency and care. And with the government looking to speed up the adoption process we examine what this might mean for children in care and the adults who adopt them". Here is the link

Four Thought This 14 minute talk flows beautifully and sheds light  into grief and loss across the ages and all ages. Its a delight. The BBC website says: "The eminent psychiatrist Colin Murray Parkes illuminates the importance of secure attachments for human happiness and sees insecurity at the root of conflict and extremism. Accepting advice from wise outsiders is crucial, he argues, whether healing the emotional wounds of bereavement or breaking the cycle of political violence. "Out of this support new national and personal identities are emerging with subtle changes in the feelings that go with them." Here is the link

Adoption is based on loss and creates disrupted attachments. The juxtaposition of these two progammes offers listeners the opportunity to step back and take a life long view of grief, loss, adoption, attachment and the importance of relationships. This is the gem of an hour: perfect listening while performing some dull, necessary task (ironing, window cleaning, varnishing your nails). ENJOY.

Below is the full 3 page response I have submitted to the Department of Education ... sorry if its a bit long for a blog, but I wanted you to be able to read it as soon as I'd submitted it. See 21st July blog (The secret of good comedy) for links and details.

A CALL FOR VIEWS ON CONTACT ARRANGEMENTS FOR CHILDREN

BY DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION

RESPONSE FROM HELEN OAKWATER 20 August 2012

OVERVIEW

Whilst I welcome any serious intention to resolve some of the most challenging issues in the adoption and fostering world, I am saddened that the call for views on contact falls short in many areas.

      i.        Timing

a.    The call for views on two papers (Contact and Sibling Placement) was issued on 25^th July 2012, responses are expected by 31 August 2012.

b.    This period covers school holidays, the Olympics and the 6 week period when many people are away from offices on holiday. This consultation period is far too short.

c.    Because of this narrow time frame, consultation within organisations is difficult and some are unable to respond.

d.    This ‘urgent’ approach will make the accuracy of responses and feedback justifiably open to criticism.

    ii.        Your frame that “this paper does not cover the development and impact of social media” excludes one of the most prominent and ever increasing issues within adoption and fostering today. Facebook is transforming the concept of contact. To push it to a sideline and simply say “we are interested in gathering views on this issue” does not reflect the current problems for parents, children and professionals. Its impact must be acknowledged and be central to planning future practice and/or legislation. (Page 5)

   iii.        The request for responses that involve Yes/No box ticking has the potential to produce statistics which do not reflect the complexity of the issues; but might be used as validation for a particular approach or as part of a press release. 

   iv.        Recently there have been several documents and proposals released by the government. It’s rather sad that this, bit by bit, parts approach is happening rather than looking at the whole system. Just as adopted children need a “join the dots” strategy to digest their life story, so the adoption world needs a more measured systemic approach to transformation. 

As the author of the 60,000 word book, Bubble Wrapped Children: How Social Networking is Transforming the face of 21^st Century adoption, published in January 2012, I have given much thought to contact and how it fits into the complex world of adoption and fostering.

Sadly my response is written with more haste than I would like and is brief. This response does not cover all my concerns; I have simply highlighted specific areas. (The bracketed numbers refer to your paragraphs).

1.    ADOPTION IS BASED ON LOSS, MATREATMENT AND NEGLECT

·         We must always remember that for the last 20/30 years the vast majority of children adopted were removed from birth families who failed their children on many levels. The courts removing their parenting responsibilities because of the maltreatment their children experienced.

·         The legacy of trauma is carried throughout childhood and into adulthood.

·         Helping children understand the reasons behind their maltreatment and neglect and is the task of good therapeutic reparenting, appropriate therapy and professional input throughout childhood and adolescence.

·         Contact has to fit into this model, not be a disconnected adjunct.

2.    LEGISLATION OR UNDERSTANDING?

·         The idea that legislation, which by definition is rigid and fixed, can fulfil the complex and changing patterns of appropriate contact for an adopted child over many years is too simplistic and inflexible.

·         Such legislation would be almost impossible to enforce.

·         It must be remembered that many birth parents have shown little empathy for their children, hostility to professionals and sometimes disrespect the law. Do we really expect these people to adhere to a “no contact” agreement? What happens when they don’t?

·         The suggestion that a “Permission Filter” (38) be sought by birth parents from the court is potentially a massive time waster and again impossible to enforce. It could add to delay.

·         The suggestion (paragragh 40) that “any further contact between their child and their childs birth parent is now a matter exclusively for the adoptive family” is naïve and almost denies the significance of birth parents. We know that birth parents always matter to the child. It almost smells like the old fashioned mindset of “forget them now you are adopted”. We have massive evidence demonstrating that strategy is flawed.

·         What precise “recourse” (49) for adopters is envisaged “where informal contact arrangements were causing difficulties”? How are birth parents to be prevented from sending texts, emails or similar? I can just imagine the headline “I was imprisoned for sending a text to my daughter”. This is unworkable and unenforceable. Additionally; it has the potential for children to use it as ammunition against their adoptive or foster parents. “You stopped me seeing my Mum”.

·         The best method to manage contact is by giving children 100% truth about their past in an age appropriate way, creating a coherent, honest life story which they can digest and process as they mature. Contact should be incorporated into the process. This requires a massive improvement in post adoption support, therapeutic work to make sense of their history and much therapeutic reparenting. It’s not a quick fix.

3.    CRITERIA FOR “BEST INTEREST”

The “prism of the child’s best interest” (31) is a lovely phrase and I hope:

a)    the criteria and spectrum for “best interest” will be detailed and defined

b)    this prism will consider how “best interest” is served and perceived in the short, medium and particularly, in the long term.

·         For example a well facilitated contact session for a younger child may be upsetting, but without it, their adolescence may be blighted through ignorance and unanswered questions. Unresolved trauma increases with time, which has consequences.

4.    SOCIAL MEDIA

Contact via Facebook between adopted and foster children and the birth family from whom they have been removed is occurring, will continue to happen and is unstoppable. We must accept it, recognise the underlying motivation for all parties and adapt our current and future practices accordingly. It must be central to planning any government contact strategy.

5.    CONTACT: QUANTITY, QUALITY OR PURPOSEFUL

·         Good contact has purpose and meaning for all participants. This requires planning and facilitation.

·         Quality contact is so much more than a few people being in a room together. We need therapists and social workers trained to provide high quality facilitated contact which works for all three corners of the adoption triangle.

·         Contact is just one aspect of ongoing adoption support which should be provided for all adopted children and their families pre-placement and into early adulthood.

6.    OTHER ISSUES

·         “Concurrent planning is suitable for looked after children under 2” (33) is a massive generalisation and not evidenced based. Although Coram and others have had success with concurrent planning, to make this massive leap is a flawed conclusion.

·         Martin Narey’s claim that there is “extensive research” is inaccurate. There is some research and some studies, which show varying results and conflicting conclusions. Another aspect that must be recognised is the size of studies. The Neil research (41) was a sample of around 50 children. Also the 39 members of the birth family involved were willing to work with professionals. This is not the usual story; most birth families are not so cooperative. We must be wary of drawing far reaching conclusions from small samples.

·         Birth families have a concern and interest in the children that were removed. Just because they could not care for them does not mean they didn’t care about them.

·         Birth families consist of parents, siblings, grandparents, aunts, uncles and others. Many of them have an interest/concern about their relatives who were accommodated within the care system. These needs must be acknowledged. Exclusion may force them down the “unauthorised” route.

FINALLY

Facilitated purposeful contact is one aspect of ongoing adoption support which should be provided for all adopted children and their families pre-placement and into early adulthood.

Children who experienced maltreated and neglect need a variety of adoption support tools, methods and practices to piece together their earlier shattering experiences.

These traumatised children and their parents need long term robust strategies and ongoing support from government and society. Please can we take a systemic and balanced approach and focus on the long term outcomes in adoption, not just pre-placement or single issues.

The quote  below is the opening statement I made at the BAAF Annual Health Conference on 25 June 2012. You can download the entire 55 minute speech as an iTunes podcast. 

Maltreatment and neglect is at the heart of adoption and fostering. Unless a child had suffered very significant harm they would not have needed social services and the courts to intervene in their lives and remove them from their birth families.

These children would not have needed YOU to make educated guesses about their early experiences and decide their suffering was so intense that they needed to be ripped from their original family, placed with strangers and “looked after” by the state.

I use this emotional language quite deliberately. My remit is to set the frame that reminds us that when a child is maltreated their experience is sensory. When that child is hit, screamed at or ignored they feel, see hear, taste or smell something awful …. And no one comforts them, no one soothes their pain, no one cradles them until they are calm".

Click here to download so you can listen to the speech at your convenience. I find driving the best time. Hope you enjoy it.

We all drag our historical baggage behind us; our Charged Reactive Angry Particles and  Selected Hurts Internalized and Trapped.

This 3.33minute video, explains why and how negative childhood experiences impact us  for decades until safe meaningful interventions enabling us to dump our historical crap and shit.

Its why sometimes as adults we feel small and scared inside, because unidentified fears or limiting beliefs holds us back. Thats why we must intervene early to tackle the legacy of childhood trauma (neglect and maltreatment).

This video is a "staged extract", normally delivered within Helen's Trauma Triggered Behaviour workshop. The metaphor and "language" is quite deliberate. Feedback from Trauma Triggered Behaviour workshop participants is that it really works for them. Hope you find the video useful.

The secret of good comedy..... is .... ...... pause .... delay .... pause ......TIMING.

Let me tell you ...  this one will crack your sides. The Department for Education yesterday (Friday 21 July 2012) issued two consultation documents:

• Placing sibling groups for adoption - A call for views (11 pages)
• Contact arrangements for children - A call for views (20 pages

And the punch line is ... they want responses by 31 August  ... which is precisely 6 weeks and during the school holidays.   See if you can fit your response in between the 100m heats and the closing ceremony! Here is the link.

It's yet another ludicrous timescale to respond to massively complex issues.

I really wish the government would start understanding that adoption is about the bitter legacy of neglect and maltreatment and start having joined up, big picture consultations and approach adoption systemically rather than just with juicy headlines. Those of us who live and work with the legacy of trauma know its pervasive effects last for decades.

Sadly, this well intentioned strike lands with a groan.

“This is a book primarily about adopted teens reconnecting with their birth families over social networking sites such as Facebook.

However, from early on you realise it is so much more than that, making this an invaluable tool for adopters of children of all ages.

Bubble Wrapped Children refers to the traumatised adopted child who has tried to protect him/herself by a metaphorical wrapping of protective layers. It is the adoptive parent who has to peel away these layers and face up to what is underneath so the child can develop healthy attachments.

In explaining how we deal with the challenges posed by Facebook, and birth families popping up uninvited into bedrooms and living rooms around the country, Helen has managed to give us a clear and concise understanding of what makes traumatised children tick.

Without that knowledge, we, as parents or workers, do not know why it is so important that we help our children and educate them to protect them against a possible distressing and life-changing chance encounter via the internet.

“Both child and birth parents have unconscious sensory memories which will be triggered by the reconnection or just the possibility of linking. If that reconnection is not planned or facilitated, it will probably feel very unsafe for both parties, certainly hugely emotionally charged. Two vulnerable people will hook up without a safety net. The potential to confuse and retraumatise each other is huge.”

Using metaphors, diagrams case studies, anecdotes and her own personal experience as an adoptive parent and trainer, she untangles what is a complex issue and manages to get you to look at it from everyone’s perspective – the birth parent, the child and the adoptive parent.

By summing this up Helen has put together a book that is useful to all parents not only those of teens. Prospective adopters, still some way off from welcoming a child into their home will benefit just as much from reading this, as it will help them to gain a full understanding of why knowing a child’s history matters so much.

While praising the book for its wide reader appeal it would be remiss of me not to mention that it also does a great job in tackling the ever present issue of social networking, by offering practical strategies and ideas that will help both parents and social workers.

Among her list of recommendations at the end of the book Helen – as well as calling for improved preparation and support for adopters and training for therapists on trauma-triggered behaviour – asks that Facebook face up to what is happening and offer funding to the adoption and fostering world.”

Written by Karam Radwan, editor Adoption Today

Today's release of the OFSTED report "Right on Time: Exploring Delays in adoption highlighted:

• the court delays in adoption
• good practice in adoption services including adopter feedback on assessments
• adoption panels did not cause delay
• care proceeding cause delay - quote "The key factor causing delay in tracked cases was the length of time for care proceedings to be concluded before an adoption plan could be confirmed. A high number of cases had been subject to repeat or late assessments of parents or members of the wider family. The time taken to carry out these assessments often had a measurable and adverse impact upon the timely granting of a placement order".

http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/right-time-exploring-delays-adoption

Unlike many other reports this one does not criticize social workers. You might need a cuppa to recover from that. The summary is 5 pages , the full report 43 pages.  So kettle on, feet up, dunk your hobnob and digest well.

Its about time adoption workers had some good press. Lets hope the court professionals, Judges, Lawyers and CAFCASS officers start getting their collective houses in order and Care Proceedings start moving at the child's pace, not the current bureaucratic crawl.

Below are extracts from the review of Bubble Wrapped Children on the Pinktape blog by  Sarah Phillimore, barrister at St John’s Chambers (@svphillimore), Bristol.

"I discussed some of the issues around adoption and Facebook in an earlier guest post. I do not doubt that this is a serious issue which requires urgent engagement from all those who work in this field. However, I wonder whether attempting to present the book as one with a single issue focus is in fact doing it a disservice.

This is more than just an analysis of the particular impact of social networking sites. It has to be, because the implications of such ad hoc contact cannot be fully understood without some appreciation of how adoptive children might be different to those raised with uninterrupted and healthy attachments to their primary carers.

The book inevitably has to cover a very wide range of topics in order to allow the reader to fully understand the full potential for harm from such unexpected contact to children already traumatised by earlier life experiences. The author sets out to explain the likely nature and extent of trauma suffered by the adopted child and the ways in which the child can be helped to make sense of his or her world. She also puts herself in the shoes of the birth parents and considers how they might be thinking and feeling and how this can influence their actions.

The book is thus an excellent resource for those coming new to the system and who require an introduction to the psychological theories around attachment and trauma. The author is able to present a number of quite complicated concepts in direct and vivid language, making good use of metaphor and diagrams to aid understanding; I found illuminating the example of child development as a river. Some rivers flow smoothly to the sea, others are turbulent with additional murky tributaries. Which river would you rather navigate?

Thus, the book goes much wider than just the single issue of the ‘Facebook question’. For me, its true core and most urgent call to action is found at page 111 where the author states:

‘Even though parents don’t have the professional expertise and knowledge of attachment and trauma trained therapists, they are, in the most part, expected to raise traumatised children without support or therapeutic input from professionals’.

Indeed. With an adoption disruption rate of about 25% we can’t afford to ignore this stark and sad reality. I would recommend this book to anyone who needs an introduction to or refreshment of their understanding of the current psychological theories around trauma and attachment, be they lawyer, social worker or a potential adopters." Sarah Phillimore

Is a good process for speeding up  the court system and getting children secure in a permanent home (whether adoptive, fostered or original family) being diminished due to the Government withdrawing funding?

The Radio 4 Programme Law in Action had a feature on Londons Family Drug and Alcohol Court, which has a different model for family proceedings when parents substance abuse significantly affects their parenting capacity. The FDAC piece starts ten minutes into the programme and lasts for 17 minutes. Broadcast on 13th and 15th March it's available via this link to BBC iplayer.

FDAC seems practical, effective with some sensible out of the box thinking, because social services and the courts work in parallel, serving parents who are at risk of having their children removed due to drug and alcohol abuse. This speeds permanence. It is made clear immediately  to birth parents what behavioural change is expected from them  (ie not waiting months for an 'experts report')  and that losing their children is a distinct possibility. Clear, concise, child focused with permenance being the desired outcome.

However funding is threatened. How does that fit with Government wanting  faster decisions made about children entering the adoption system?

The Department of Education released their "Adoption action plan for tackling delay" on 14 March. However it seems to be the first of a series of proposals. This one is just about delays.

The link to the DfE website gives you their statement and (at the bottom of their page) links to various other useful pdf documents including the Expert Working Group's report on redesigning adoption, (25 pages of balanced, informed views) which takes a wider view than just "tackling delay". I think its well of worth making a cuppa and spending 15 minutes quietly absorbing the content, as it lays out some of the deeper context and longer term challenges in adoption and gives something of a framework for the next steps.

It appears that during the next few months we will be drip fed the proposed changes to adoption including legislation promised in the Queens Speech in May. So, looks like we are heading for unmapped territory. Seat belts on folks.

Also learnings from the Trauma Triggered Behaviour one day workshops, may make the journey ahead easier. Workshops are being delivering in Rhyl, Newport, Fareham, Swindon, Warrington, Leeds, Birmingham and Belfast over the next few months.  These have been enjoyed and deemed "very useful" by social workers, adopters, medics, foster carers, psychologists and teachers. Be lovely to see you there.