Anon
I appreciate this may be controversial in the adoption world, and I definitely agree some (many?) of our children experience trauma. But more and more, I’m seeing there are other things at play too—sometimes as well as, sometimes instead of trauma issues (same for attachment theories…).
Such as neglect—our children often miss out on huge amounts of incremental positive parenting in the early years, something not to be considered lightly. Otherwise, what’s the point of all that early years good parenting in the more regular families we know?
There are also often undiagnosed, multi-generational biological, neurodevelopmental, and mental health issues, all significantly more common in children who have been in care. These are probably a factor in why they ended up in care as well—the challenges pass along generations. Of course, many of these things interact; it’s not one or the other, it’s several. We’re all a complex mix of nature and nurture.
As a parent (I also trained as a psychologist and in evidence-based health and social sciences), I knew something else was going on with our ADs. From records and conversations, I knew our children were not traumatised by their birth family experiences. It was clear from the way they talked about their experiences over many years. One was traumatised from recurrent “smacking” in a long-term LA foster carer experience—something the LAs involved could not have cared less about—but we helped her work through that to the point she no longer remembers it.
The girls also bonded with us surprisingly quickly and deeply (surprising because of our own intense, internal struggles at the relentless challenges their complex issues brought). Having said that, we were very diligent at keeping these struggles away from the girls. They kept saying and showing us their love and trust over and over again. As a parent, you feel it too, don’t you?
So I knew there were other things going on, something that must explain the recurrent, inexplicable, random emotional and behavioural extremes. I just didn’t know what—until we were finally able to access specialist NHS multi-disciplinary, multi-level assessments. These identified all sorts of additional biological, neuro, and health factors for both girls. Despite my background, I’d missed most of these. I had subconsciously been drawn into the SW narrative of loving and working more deeply to fix things. It was only by working with this intelligent, caring, and insightful team that I could see what had been obvious all along.
On the attachment and trauma (A&T) framework, if I’m feeling generous, I can give benefit of the doubt to SWs. (Tbh, I don’t feel generous to SWs this year, given how appallingly our LA is behaving. But my Mum was a SW, I grew up around SWs, have various friends who are, and I think I have insights into how it goes. I believe I ‘get’ many of the challenges. But I just cannot excuse the dishonesty of SWs through the ranks, up to their leadership teams, knowingly and destructively misleading the courts to avoid paying for support and to persecute adopters who have asked for it repeatedly. That persecution is about the LA’s interests and ‘needs,’ not the children’s. Anyway, that aside…)
It seems fair to say SWs are primarily trained in theories of attachment, trauma, and child protection (too often interpreted as “must be the parents’ fault”), but not the bigger picture, not multi-disciplinary evidence-based practice, nor research methods. Through no fault of their own, they are not taught how to critically appraise research studies and separate the most reliable from the theoretical, anecdotal, and subjective opinions.
In this context, things that are untrue, ineffective, or unhelpful can be repeated over again as if true, especially when professions operate within their own echo chamber. Mounting evidence from the wider world suggests A&T is not the full picture here.
Unfortunately for us, LAs are gatekeepers to much adoption support, including in schools, health, and the Adoption Support Fund (ASF). SWs controlling the ASF also means resource-strapped CAMHS tend to send our children back to SWs who are seen to have budget (there’s UK research showing this too), instead of undertaking the much broader, standardised multi-disciplinary assessments they need to access interventions that might work. This means our children are denied proper health care, delivered by appropriately trained health professionals, a universal human right.
Sadly, research on the ASF shows it is often the least evidence-based, least effective ‘therapies’ that get commissioned for adoptive families. (I question the word ‘therapies’ as many of us are concerned about the lack of relevant professional training and qualifications of those assessing and delivering interventions.)
For us, even with my background in health and social sciences, it was a long, challenging, depleting slog to break through the SW/CAMHS barriers to get proper assessments and diagnoses. This finally enabled us to access interventions that work—by this time, already 8.5 years in. It has helped our youngest AD finally access appropriate health and education support. She still has some significant issues, but at least these are better understood and managed now (apart from by the LA, as and when it suits).
Imagine how much further on we could have been if this had happened from the start. Tragically, along with various other LA delays and failures, it came too late for our eldest, and we are in breakdown. We hope that at least now, having her conditions on her NHS records will enable her to access proper help in the future, if she chooses (of course, the LA still tries to sabotage this as it suits).
We are thankful that she is with a good family, made possible via the brilliant school we got her into a few years back (following yet another long fight to secure her EHCP). We really hope she gets what she needs to move forward into adulthood positively (while at the same time, utterly conscious of all the stories here and knowing what can happen).
https://yalereview.org/article/aminatta-forma-trauma-overuse