Adoption by lesbian couple - Essay Example

? Adoption, lesbian couple case study Introduction Undeniably, UK’s adoption procedure despite its good intention of ascertaining adoptees’ suitability in their future respective homes has turned to be a nightmare to numerous potential adopters. This is because of its prolonged and demoralizing procedures’ steps imposed by the agencies meant to ensure adopters’ competence and patience. Consequently, this has prompted the state to intervene via devising measures whose core purpose is to ease quick placement of the adoptees and reduce augmenting numbers in the adoption agencies. This essay via utilizing Jacqui and Anne’s case, seeks to highlight various aspects and obstacles that have rendered adoption process to be complex despite some measures imposed by the agencies not emphasized by the law. The first obstacle encompasses cultural differences amid the child on one side and would-be adopters. Since, both the parties emanate from varied cultures whereby the child may not be able to integrate well with the couple as necessitated and feel secured while under their care. Unaccompanied asylum seekers before arriving in UK, most of them have experienced untold sufferings to the extent of some traumatized (Coghill, 2009). Hence, the relevant authorities (adoption agencies) insist on presenting them to the individuals whom they deem beyond doubt will avail them the necessary care, comfort and love. Since, these children have to learn the state’s language besides embracing the new culture different from theirs, which is entirely diverse and may pose a challenge to them (Manchester City Council, 2013). Therefore, the social worker’s showing of displeasure was due to the pair’s plea to adopt despite their economic instability (Coghill, 2009). Cultural difference may pose a great challenge to the adopting parents because besides helping the child to embrace that of UK, they will not be able to understand the child’s former traditions. For instance, suppose the child emanates from Africa where child’s nurturing is exclusively diverse from the western states (Manchester City Council, 2013). Most African cultures regardless of a one’s sex usually deem the mother has more responsibilities in nurturing the child until the males reach the initiation age where the fathers take over. This is divergent to the UK where the couple assumes all the roles jointly and it may have significant adverse impact especially if the adoptee is a teen (Coghill, 2009. Besides, the child may doubt the relationship of the adopting parents, (adoption) which conflicts what he or she has all through deemed to be right (Coghill, 2009). Since, in African or other regions like Asian, same sex union aspect is a taboo that may affect the child (Coghill, 2009, p. 54). This is especially when one is aware of what their culture dictates regarding marriage. Hence, prompting the social agency to reject Jacqui and Anne’s plea. Besides, according to their narration, there is no prove they will be together until the child attains his or her independence stage (Coghill, 2009). This is because they argue to be living together but no documents to prove their union (Coghill, 2009). Another obstacle regards the preference of race, which by extension they offered to have, whereby the adoption agency will be reluctant in letting the pair get the adoptee of their choice (Allen, 2005). Since, this may add up to worsening the child’s state besides the distress or severe experiences, he or she might have experienced (Allen, 2005). Probably, this was the reason that displeased social worker to the extent of not hearkening to their plea and declined to offer them any apparent reason (Allen, 2005). Because the adopters may perceive the agency operates on racial bases, which is not tolerable in UK. The UK statutes have mandated agencies to act in any case in the favor of the child irrespective of who may be intending to act as adopters (Allen, 2005). This implies the child’s needs are “paramount”, hence their will be no compromise about the placement’s safety (Allen 2005, p. 56). Therefore, race aspect may pose an obstacle to both Jacqui and Anne’s plea because despite their good intention, agency might prefer the child to have adopters emanating from a similar the ethnic or race. This is because the child will not encounter great diversity due to skin color, hence viewed by his or her peers being different from the adopters. However, UK laws do not advocate much emphasis on same race matching, but holds the agencies to be accountable for the child’s safety (Great Britain 2002, p. 9). Child’s welfare is indisputable to the extent of some local authorities devising certain measures meant to aid them in ensuring effective safety and comfort to the adoptees. These encompass prolonged waiting coupled with matching that in most cases consider the parties’ involved race or ethnicity with an intention of minimizing diversity (Bella, 2010). Since, child’s nurturing usually vary across races, for instance, the African child where due their kinky hair will entail extra consideration. This is especially in terms of hair braiding before sleeping and while attending outdoor activities, which is the role of the mother. The race matching aspect will persist even in future though laws do not emphasize it like adoption agencies (Bella, 2010). Since, agencies contend this is among the resolutions that will ensure child’s safety besides eliminating great diversity that may be evident between the child and would-be foster (Allen, 2005). In UK, laws state the lowest age limit for a potential adopter ought to be 21 years but no upper, though some agencies have imposed certain specifications regarding the latter (Coghill, 2009, p. 442). They contend one ought to have an average of 38 years due to the physical requirements of the child while growing (Lockwood, 2007). Activities include playing especially during interclass interactions where parents ought to be present and other varied games while still in their residences, which the child may need to see fosters actively involved (BemyParent, n.d). Therefore, Jacqui and Anne despite the laws not specifying the upper age limit of potential fosters, they will experience rejection due to their age (Lockwood, 2007). This is because the agency might have considered them tending to the age of being inactive, where undertaking certain roles that entail physical may be a challenge. Hence, this prompts the child perceive fosters do not have any interest in their games, which is divergent to other children’s parents (BemyParent, n.d). The agency due to Jacqui and Anne advanced ages, may have also deemed the pair is unable to socialize the child adequately especially during games or other related tasks. Besides, their advanced age limits will not allow them satisfactorily cater for the critical needs of their teenage child, because by then will have attained an age of 50 plus years (BemyParent, n.d). The upper age limit imposed by diverse authorities will be an obstacle, which Jacqui and Anne cannot evade despite land’s laws not stating its emphasis (Allen, 2005). However, the agencies may attach essence on them due to the responsibility they have assumed meant to ensure the children’s welfare, which in all considerations the court refers them as “Paramount” (Allen, 2005). Additionally, the aspect of not having a car may be a detriment to the child especially when socializing with fellow peers whom their parents comprise the affluent caste (Tasker, Mcclure & Acerini, 2008). Hence, affecting the child’s social life because he or she may start feeling excluded especially when at a tender age and cannot fathom why his or her parents do not have a car (Tasker, Mcclure & Acerini, 2008). Probably, this could be the reason of the social worker seeming displeased, which the duo made as plea regarding their choice. Besides, residing in countryside without a car will also prompt the child start degrading oneself, once he or she starts making comparison with own peers who may be having family transport means especially after schooling. This may even extend to teenage or onset of adulthood and yield to adverse behavior meant to draw attention from the peers (Tasker, Mcclure & Acerini, 2008). Since, the person will be seeking opportunity to prove his or her presence via being contrary to the peers, which may encompass breaking laws (Coghill, 2009). Then, the child ends up being a burden and not thriving in life like others. To shun this, agencies yield to considering the potential fosters’ property though not emphasized by adoption laws; to ensure adoptee’s suitability (Tasker, Mcclure & Acerini, 2008). The law demand one to have adequate maturity meant to handle the child while in diverse development phases especially when one is at teen stage (Tasker, Mcclure & Acerini, 2008). The pair’s unstable income may pose another obstacle, which the agency may not be willing to compromise. Since, it is the mandate of the agency to ascertain adoptee’s suitability in the home where he or she will reside before attaining independence stage. In Anne and Jacqui’s case, the latter is the only one who has a stable income, which according to the agency’s evaluation cannot cater adequately for the adoptee’s comfort despite their good will to adopt. Probably, this could be the reason why social worker exhibited displeasure due to the requirements of an adoptee and especially if one is of different race from that of the adopters. Because besides the car which the adopters claims not to have, the child may wish to have other varied necessities that his or her peers possess. Therefore, once the adoptee unveils the adopters are unable to offer the necessities he or she wants, may develop self-hatred to the extent of life being meaningless. Since, what he or she will be experiencing is a lighter extension of the past in a state where instead of being among the haves, one belongs to the have-nots. Hence, affecting the adoptee’s socialization because one he or she will be viewing oneself as a second in the society. Initially, the entire state’s authorities mandated with ensuring adoptees access quality and comfortable homes segregated gay adopters (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011, p. 107). This was evident especially when they approached catholic agencies who due to their statutes even to date they have failed to admit gay unions (Politics.co.uk, 2013). Since, the church deems society owing to its numerous failures prompted by modernization and the urge to evade parental roles has result to these weird unions (Politics.co.uk, 2013). Hence, substitute what ought to be morally right to lesser unions meant to offer temporary satisfaction. Therefore, gay unions do not have any moral education meant for the adoptees (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011). This debate continued for certain duration before UK’s regime giving their stand, which prompted the church to give in though with threats of closing their agencies (Politics.co.uk, 2013). Presently, gay similar to other fosters or adopters can approach these institutions with no segregation and submit their pleas through the right procedures (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011). In addition, the enactment of Equality Act 2006 offered fair consideration for the gay unions to be potential adopters or fosters (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011, p. 107). Because of this Act, the agencies may review Jacqui and Anne’s case, which the social worker had frowned upon before. Since, they will be exercising their privileges meant to offload great burden from the state by availing proper setting meant for the adoptees (Govtoday, 2013). The need to alter these strict laws that barred gays from adopting or fostering, entailed to ensure equality among the natives notwithstanding one’s sexual orientation1 (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011). Besides, the state aimed at phasing out criminalization of both gays and lesbianism that had persisted for approximately 20 years (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011, p. 107). Hence, reposition their status in the public coupled with granting their wishes especially those according to the agencies’ evaluation had the potential of offering decent child upbringing (Politics.co.uk, 2013). Presently, the state’s regime via meticulous research, which encompassed addressing numerous people’s complaints regarding long adoption delays; has cited is the contributing factor behind the augmenting number of children in the agencies. This is even evident in Jacqui and Anne’s narration contending how the agency via its social worker has prompted them to undergo tedious process coupled with prolonged waiting (Govtoday, 2013). Since, the agencies contend this act enables them to ascertain whether the would-be fosters have the adequate patience meant to handle the adoptee. Hence, prompting those who were not serious to quit in the midst of the long procedure. However, this affects the children severely besides prompting the would-be fosters to incur untold expenses and eventually demoralized similar to the Jacqui and Anne’s case (Bella, 2010). Since, the agencies ought to ensure effective placement orders’ settling with the courts before any would-be foster assumes the responsibility of the child’s safety (Govtoday, 2013). According to Bella (2010), numerous potential adopters similar to Jacqui and Anne have experienced long waiting durations coupled with emotional drain in the past while trying to adopt in UK, for instance, Francesca Polini who eventually resulted to international adopting. This is because of the UK’s prolonged and insignificant stages incorporated in the adoption process meant to ascertain the adopters’ suitability, but the procedure does more to demoralize than encourage adopters. Besides, the officials heading these agencies there earlier devised unnecessary procedures whose core purpose entailed to complicate the entire process (Govtoday, 2013). Presently, measures implemented have phased out these procedures besides ensuring the adoptees do not stay in the agencies more three months2 (Govtoday, 2013). The core purpose of these measures encompasses reducing the number of held up adoptees by the agencies coupled with availing their comfort quickly. Hence, ensuring early and effective emotional with the would-be families instead of overstaying in the agencies to the extent of lacking any potential adopters. Since, most of them have given owing to the prolonged procedures that are inconsequential (Govtoday, 2013). Besides, the state due to numerous complaints from the psychiatrists entailed to shun varied sufferings, which these adoptees usually experience while in these agencies. These comprise both emotional attachment and behavioral predicaments that affected them once given up to respective families or in life. Since in the agencies owing to concentration, they lack adequate individual consideration whereby the institution’s officials treat them as an entity and not having close ties with the children (Dunk-West & Hafford-Letchfield 2011). This affects them to the extent of not being able to socialize well or family aspect lack meaning in their lives. Hence prompting the state to eliminate numerous insignificant steps meant for adoption (Govtoday, 2013). Elimination of these insignificant procedures prompted the state to establish a two-stage approval method (Govtoday, 2013). This enabled the adoptee to start residing with would-be fosters while the court approving placement order documents, which is contrary to the past (Govtoday, 2013). Establishment of two-stage approval would have enabled both Jacqui and Anne to have the adoptee whom they had preferred with all other new measures catered as necessitated. Since, in their narration they contend of social worker’s reluctance to tell them what they might have lacked to the extent of not being able to be would-be fosters. Probably, this could be the earlier slow and prolonged strategies meant to eliminate them (Coghill, 2009). The government established this measure to ensure shun overcrowding evident in the agencies (Coghill, 2009). Besides, it entailed to ensure adoptees within three months of their acceptance in the agencies already have potential would-be fosters (Coghill, 2009). Conclusion This essay has proven that adoption is a complex process despite varied measures and Acts, which the UK regime has recently devised with the intention of reducing adoptees’ augmenting numbers evident in the agencies. Since, agencies owing to the responsibility bestowed by the government have resulted to imposing certain varied requirements, which potentials adopters ought to fulfill. Hence, making the entire process long, emotionally draining and demoralizing especially to the potential adopters; prompting them to prefer international adoption. Since, agencies’ criteria encompass considering race, culture and even to some extent adopters’ economic stability, which the regime’s laws have not emphasized but on contrary the adopters’ availing of comfort and love. References Allen, N. 2005. Making Sense of the Children Act And Related Legislation for the Social and Welfare Services. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons. Bella, B. 2010. Forced ABROAD to adopt our girl after the council said we were too white for them. The Sun, 29Th December 2010. BemyParent, n.d. Can I adopt or foster if I consider myself an 'older' parent? There is no legal upper age limit to adopting or fostering. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 January 2013]. Coghill, D. (2009). Child and adolescent psychiatry. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Dunk-West, P., & Hafford-Letchfield, T. (2011). Sexual identities and sexuality in social work: research and reflections from women in the field. Farnham, Surrey, England, Ashgate. Govtoday, 2013. Local Government: Measures to improve adoption and fostering. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 January 2013]. Great Britain, 2002. Adoption and Children Act 2002: Explanatory notes. [S.l.], Stationery Office. Lockwood, G. 2007. Fertility & infertility for dummies. Chichester, John Wiley. Manchester City Council, 2013. Fostering Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children: Caring for Unaccompanied Asylum Seeking Children and Young People (UASC). [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 January 2013]. Politics.co.uk, 2004-2013. Adoption and Fostering. [online] Available at: [Accessed 14 January 2013]. Tasker, R. C., Mcclure, R. J., & Acerini, C. L. (2008). Oxford handbook of paediatrics. Oxford, Oxford University Press. Read More