I am watching a video on Facebook of a mother who has lost her newborn to Forced Adoption. As heartbreaking as it is to watch, it is a story I have heard over and over again. In a few of the cases I have worked on in the UK, I have seen all of the documents, in fact, I have seen more of the evidence than the judges have seen in these cases. I have also seen cases where parents have fled the UK and Social Services in other countries, where Forced Adoption is not legal, they were allowed to keep their babies. In fact I have even met social workers involved in these cases and interviewed them for the book.
In the video I am watching, a young, first-time mother, as soon as she got pregnant, social services became involved because they had “concerns”. Bear in mind that this was her first-born, her ability as a parent could not reasonably be determined since she didn’t have a child and there was no evidence that she had ever abused a child. I have to say in the interest of fairness, that I don’t know enough about the case to say whether the Forced Adoption is justified or not. I am listening to one side of the story, and I wouldn’t make a judgement based on hearing one side. I can say however, that in every other case I have seen or dealt with, in none of those cases was the Forced Adoption justified.
I wrote in great depth about other cases in the book, but there is a pattern that you get to see over and over again. When councils were being paid bonuses to adopt more children in the UK, only 6% of the children in “Care” were adopted, the majority of cases were like this one, social workers identify a baby for adoption and the parent is put on a treadmill with targets they have no hope of hitting. The UK government set an impossible target of Fast-Tracking Forced Adoption within 2 months. They will tell the parent they need to do a course or training which will take several months, and then say no places are available for months, the Forced Adoption would be finalized probably 4 months before the parent finishes.
In a case I assisted on in the UK, the mother had been placed in a “Mother and Baby Unit”. By the time this mother and her team were finished with social services, Tadpole Cottage was shut down and Dr George Hibbert was facing a Fitness to Practice Committee at the GMC. Incredibly, he was cleared of professional misconduct. Among the psychological tests a mother faced was changing a flat tyre at the side of the road while caring for her baby. In the end the highly controversial General Medical Council dropped the charges against him.
I have even seen a case in Ireland where an English mother and her husband relocated to Ireland even though he was serving in the British Army and had completed a tour in Afghanistan. Irish social services were notified by UK social services that this woman was such a risk to children that her previous children were forcibly adopted. When she was pregnant, 6 months before the due date, she became a legal resident of Ireland. She contacted us on arrival and we advised her to contact Irish social services, provide them with all her records and engage with them to see what concerns they had if any. Their response was not to engage with her until the day the baby was born. In fact, they even placed a Police surveillance car outside her home for weeks before the baby was born. She was monitored 24/7 even though she was not accused of any crime. If she had decided to flee the jurisdiction before the baby was born, Police would have been powerless to do anything. I know of several cases where Police resources were wasted in this way.
When the baby was born, social workers attempted a kidnapping under the law. They had no court orders and attempted to illegally invoke Section 12 of the Child Care Act which allows Irish Police to remove any child in danger without court orders. In many cases babies or children are kidnapped misusing S12 and then social workers will lie to a judge and say the baby was in such danger that the Police had to remove the child and hand them over to social workers. However, S12 requires that the Police Officer is required to establish what danger the baby was in. Since it was highly improbable that a newborn could be in any danger in a hospital while surrounded by doctors and nurses, if Police had used S12 they would not have been able to justify their actions. Despite this, S12 is regularly misused, which in the legal sense would be kidnapping, fraud upon the court, perjury and perverting the course of justice.
Despite not engaging with the mother, an Emergency Care Order was granted based on the UK evidence. Despite fighting through the courts in Ireland, the baby was deported and forcibly adopted. Last year the same mother moved to another EU country, engaged with social services there before the birth, and they had no issues. Today she lives with her new baby and is pregnant again, social services there have no issues. If she was in Ireland or the UK she would be guaranteed to lose any child she gives birth to.
So my question is; Where do adopters think these babies come from?
It has been a long time since Orphanages have existed in most of Europe. The marketing of these children includes posting their images in advertisement online and paying advertising agencies to find “forever homes” for the less adoptable children who are over aged three. Of course most adopters want babies, preferably if the baby never bonded with their mother. In a few cases in Ireland I have heard social workers trying to justify reasons why a newborn should not be breast-fed or bond. In one case we asked a High Court judge “who is the baby supposed to bond with?”. They have even stated outright that if the baby bonds and is breast-fed, that the baby will grieve for their mother and this can impact the bond with the adopters. Obviously this is child abuse to deny a newborn the opportunity to bond. It is well-known now that “Kangaroo Care” is tremendously important for newborns. Babies can die for apparent reason described as “Failure to Thrive” and human contact with their mother. It is also widely known that the bonding process begins long before the baby is born, and newborn know their mothers.
Adoption, which has long been a thriving business, believes that you can take a baby from “A” and place them with “B” and that there are no consequences to the child. Adopters believe they are saving children from a miserable existence and many have set themselves up as heroes in their own mind. Social workers have no issue with abusing a baby and as the evidence appears to show, the more financial incentives involved, the more adoptions that will take place. In the middle of all this is the baby who is being abused. But lets not forget the mother or the father of this baby who will spend the rest of their lives grieving for a living child. If these parents speak out they will be jailed. If they parents see their child on the street, they could be jailed for any form of acknowledging their own child.
In many cases children were adopted because their parents were wrongly accused of child abuse. By the time the case came to Criminal Court their children were already forcibly adopted. Supposedly, these adoptions are “Irreversible” even though they were not legally justified. This in itself is proof that Forced Adoptions are illegal. It also proves that a child can be adopted without the parents being guilty of any crime, a Human Rights abuse under “Punishment Without Crime”. A friend and colleague who has helped parents against social services since the 1960’s, Ian Josephs is the person who first coined the term “Forced Adoption” and for years he has had a website entitled Forced Adoption – Punishment Without Crime. Ian, although now in his 80’s, still works daily helping parents flee or fight their cases. Another colleague, a former British MP John Hemming has done amazing work in compiling statistics and raising the issue many times in the British Parliament. Despite all the sterling work over the years not a lot has changed.
What has changed is that far more people are now aware that children don’t come from orphanages or are voluntarily given up by bad parents. If you are going to adopt a child these days you need to do a lot of courses, spend a lot of money and a lot of time before you are given a child. With so much information these days about the controversies and the injustice of Forced Adoption, you would either have to stupid, brainwashed or so cruel that you don’t care where the baby or child came from. If an adoption can fail and an adopter hand the child back to social services, there is no good reason that adoptions can be reversed as easily as they were made.
We need to stop seeing Adoption as being a heroic act, there is nothing heroic about adopting a child who doesn’t want to be adopted or taking a child away from a parent who has not committed any crime. If the failure rates of adoption and the suicide rate of adopted children is higher than children in the general population, seeing Adoption as anything other than a form of Child Abuse is no longer acceptable. I wrote in great detail about this in the book.