Is seeking to adopt refugee children a legitimate response to the 'refugee crisis'?

[billy_bob]

Something someone I know keeps saying he wants he and his partner to do. Not sure what I think about it - some compelling arguments both for and against.

Clearly there are orphaned children who need adoptive parents as a result of any conflict and refuge-seeking situation. But there's something about the "we'll take one" response, however well-intentioned, that I'm very uncomfortable with.

What do people think?

 

[Greebo]

IMHO giving a child a home is great, but cherrypicking from countries when they still have living relatives could create problems 10-20 years down the line - look at what happened with the Roumanian "orphans" (most of whom had living parents), many of whom were put in homes because of disabilities or because they were one mouth too many in an already stretched household.

IMHO far better to foster, albeit longterm, while keeping it firmly in the heads of everyone concerned that one day they will go back to help rebuild what was their country.

 

[Belushi]

Something someone I know keeps saying he wants he and his partner to do. Not sure what I think about it - some compelling arguments both for and against.

Clearly there are orphaned children who need adoptive parents as a result of any conflict and refuge-seeking situation. But there's something about the "we'll take one" response, however well-intentioned, that I'm very uncomfortable with.

What do people think?

Adoption is a much more difficult process than just seeing some heart rending pictures on TV and then a couple of weeks later a cute orphan is delivered to your door.

 

[Manter]

There is something uncomfortable about it, true. I am finding quite a few of the grassroots groups full of people who are keen to help the children, or the women and children which is interesting. Puts pressure on families too- do you stay together and have nothing or give up part of your family so that bit of the family is cared for?

 

[Greebo]

<snip> Puts pressure on families too- do you stay together and have nothing or give up part of your family so that bit of the family is cared for?

Particularly as there may well be three or more children - take them all in, or try to support whatever kin they still have so that they at least keep their family identity?

 

[frogwoman]

Think these kids have probably been through enough and if they've still got their parents it's probably best that they stay with them assuming the parents are caring people.

 

[billy_bob]

Adoption is a much more difficult process than just seeing some heart rending pictures on TV and then a couple of weeks later a cute orphan is delivered to your door.

Indeed. And I didn't mean to suggest that the person who I'm talking about isn't aware of this/isn't prepared to go through the difficult process. Of course, the existence of a proper process that should weed out those who don't understand that is reassuring in itself, but it doesn't necessarily make adoption in these circumstances the right thing or a good thing.

e2a: "the person who I'm talking about...": I'm aware that phrases like this make it sound like I'm talking about myself and trying to pretend that I'm not. Just want to stress that this is not the case, I'm just protecting anonymity!

 

[Belushi]

Indeed. And I didn't mean to suggest that the person who I'm talking about isn't aware of this/isn't prepared to go through the difficult process. Of course, the existence of a proper process that should weed out those who don't understand that is reassuring in itself, but it doesn't necessarily make adoption in these circumstances the right thing or a good thing.

TBH If they really were aware about what adoption involves they wouldn't be asking this question to start with.

I know more about domestic rather than international adoption. My brains frazzled at the moment but I'll try and come back later with more thoughts on the subject. If they are serious about international adoption their first port of call should be the Intercountry Adoption Centre IAC : The Centre for Adoption

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Think these kids have probably been through enough and if they've still got their parents it's probably best that they stay with them assuming the parents are caring people.

Presumably the suggestion is that the adoptees would be orphans?

If anyone was suggesting otherwise that really would be fucked up.

 

[Greebo]

Presumably the suggestion is that the adoptees would be orphans? <snip>

There's a problem because a lot of children whose parents are alive end up in orphanages or children's homes. The staff might be (understandably when full to bursting) keen to encourage comparatively rich adopters by implying that none of the children there have living parents or other relatives. Once adopted across international borders, there's minimal possibility of the adopted child being reunited with whatever family they still have.

Edited to add: You know the situation's bad when everyone concerned can be convinced that they're doing the right thing and yet, between them, they manage to do a very harmful thing.

 

[Pickman's model]

adopting a refugee child is for life, not just for christmas.

 

[J Ed]

Honestly I am uncomfortable about a lot of the paternalistic language from the cohort of the recently converted to the idea that refugees are human beings, especially in regards to foreign policy.

 

[Red Cat]

Something someone I know keeps saying he wants he and his partner to do. Not sure what I think about it - some compelling arguments both for and against.

Clearly there are orphaned children who need adoptive parents as a result of any conflict and refuge-seeking situation. But there's something about the "we'll take one" response, however well-intentioned, that I'm very uncomfortable with.

What do people think?

What do you/they think they have that makes them suitable for offering a home to a traumatised child from another country that has lost his/her parents?

 

[Geri]

Honestly I am uncomfortable about a lot of the paternalistic language from the cohort of the recently converted to the idea that refugees are human beings, especially in regards to foreign policy.

I know people mean well but some people in the Facebook group where talking of 'adopting' people in the jungle so that when they got to the UK they could take them out for dinner and who them around, some others were talking about becoming their penpals and others were agonising over whether to donate tins of tuna as too much fish is apparently bad for them.

 

[miss direct]

In the vast majority of cases, I'd say it's not a good idea. Most current refugees come from cultures with far more of an extended family network than we do in the West. Adoption just isn't a normal thing to do. It just seems like another trauma on top of what they've already been through. Let's support families so they can stay together, or children so they can stay with extended family members, or friends.

 

[spanglechick]

In general: Adoption from other countries, is, when you scratch the surface, almost always buying children from families who can't afford to keep them. Give them the money, if you really want to help.

In this case it's slightly more complex, but the best thing for those children is not being permenantly removed from the vestiges of their families.

 

[LDC]

I think it's understandable in a kind of knee jerk, unthinking, guilty-liberal kind of way, but basically really, really dodgy on so many levels.

 

[Greebo]

I think it's understandable in a kind of knee jerk, unthinking, guilty-liberal kind of way, but basically really, really dodgy on so many levels.

Sponsoring a child or donating long term to at least one longterm project might bring a better outcome.

 

[frogwoman]

The thing is that a lot of these kids are prob going to need a lifetime of therapy or have needs that well meaning middle class couples in the UK can't really address. People might like the idea of it but they may not be able to cope with the reality of the kids' disturbed behaviour, leading them to give them up and even more trauma

I mean these are kids who have witnessed (or in some instances as with IS) made to take part in atrocities, a lot of the time it's the case that people who adopt or foster kids from the UK can't cope with their needs as it is, surely where possible they should be sent to live with relatives or someone who understands even slightly what they are going through? With the best will in the world i dont think a lot of people thinking of doing this actually understand what it will mean

 

[frogwoman]

There's a problem because a lot of children whose parents are alive end up in orphanages or children's homes. The staff might be (understandably when full to bursting) keen to encourage comparatively rich adopters by implying that none of the children there have living parents or other relatives. Once adopted across international borders, there's minimal possibility of the adopted child being reunited with whatever family they still have.

Edited to add: You know the situation's bad when everyone concerned can be convinced that they're doing the right thing and yet, between them, they manage to do a very harmful thing.

Wasnt there a scandal where kids were being taken to france from sudan some years ago when the parents were actually still alive?

 

[Belushi]

Imagine being a small child in a war zone, imagine fleeing your home, losing your parents. Then imagine being packed off to a cold wet island you've never heard off, away from everything you know, with people you don't know, unable to even speak the language.

Intercountry adoption can be a good thing but it should very much be the last resort. As others have said the priority should be to place the child in the extended family if possible, or at least within their community. If that's not possible and the best option is overseas adoption then hopefully they'll be placed with a family with as much experience as possible of adopting a traumatised child, or who have at least had some preparation for the challenges ahead, not just placed with well meaning people who want to help.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

Of course it fucking isn't.

 

[likesfish]

nice idea in theory
in practice a really really bad idea

 

[frogwoman]

others were agonising over whether to donate tins of tuna as too much fish is apparently bad for them.

what

What?? Seriously

 

[Geri]

what

What?? Seriously

The other day they were agonising about the fact that vitamin tablets might not be vegan. I know they mean well, but I really think they are unaware of just how bad it was in Syria, when they were having to eat cats and donkeys and grass! I think tins of tuna might be quite well received.

 

[frogwoman]

The other day they were agonising about the fact that vitamin tablets might not be vegan. I know they mean well, but I really think they are unaware of just how bad it was in Syria, when they were having to eat cats and donkeys and grass! I think tins of tuna might be quite well received.

Would someone who has escaped from Daesh really give a shit about veganism

 

[SpookyFrank]

I know people mean well but some people in the Facebook group where talking of 'adopting' people in the jungle so that when they got to the UK they could take them out for dinner and who them around, some others were talking about becoming their penpals and others were agonising over whether to donate tins of tuna as too much fish is apparently bad for them.

And you shouldn't give them sweeties before bedtime

 

[frogwoman]

If you flee hundreds of miles from daesh controlled territory with half your family dead and bombs being dropped by assad etc with no water no food and bearded lunatics running around trying to kill you and you get on a boat and just about manage to make it on to dry land where you are herded into a squalid refugee camp, and you receive some food, or some medicine, is your first thought really gonna be 'oh no these vitamin tablets are not vegan!' Christ these people

 

[Treacle Toes]

Christ these people

Luckily they are the very small minority. The vast majority of people stepping out are just getting on with it with the best intentions.

 

[SpookyFrank]

The other day they were agonising about the fact that vitamin tablets might not be vegan.

I'm a vegetarian, but if I had to drown a dozen fluffy bunny rabbits to save a human life I would. If I had to drown a dozen pompous liberal vegevangelists to save the life of a small shrub, I would.

Disclaimer: we have done vegan catering for migrants in Calais before but that was because a) we couldn't afford meat and b) we didn't want to give food poisoning to 400 people with very limited access to running water and santiation.