Tools
ToolsRennolds, Natasha, Murphy, Anne and Neil, Elsbeth (2025) Pre-Adoption Order Disruptions in England:Learning from disruption reports 2017-2024. UNSPECIFIED.
Preview |
PDF (Pre-Adoption Order Disruptions in England. Learning from disruption reports 2017-2024)
- Published Version
Download (524kB) | Preview |
Abstract
Executive Summary When a child is adopted, there are several stages that must be successfully negotiated before legal permanence is achieved. A crucial period involves the transition from being cared for by the foster carer within the foster care home to that of moving to the intended permanent home with the adopter(s). This period involves introductions, visits and the placement of the child and adjustment to family life before the application for the Adoption Order is made and legal permanence as a family granted. In England, there have been around 3000 children adopted annually since 2021 but some placements disrupt before the Adoption Order is applied for, a rate estimated to be at around 2.5% since 2019. Whilst not a high rate, this represents a figure of 479 children and the corresponding families who experience the emotional aftermath when an adoption placement fails. Whilst there is statistical data available as to the characteristics of the placement pre-order disruption in England, less is known or understood as to how and why pre-order disruptions happen and how they are experienced by the people involved. This research aimed to address the knowledge gap using a qualitative approach to learn more about how and why pre-order disruptions happen. The research involved three phases; Phase 1 sourced Disruption Overview reports from Regional Adoption Agencies (RAAs) to be thematically analysed. The disruption reports are the recording and analysis of learning meetings that take place after a disruption has happened. We received 77 reports related to 184 children from RAAs across England. The reports varied in format, length, nature of recording and focus according to the author of each report. We received everything from detailed minutes of meetings with little analysis to an overview of a cluster of disruptions with full analysis and learning points. It was noted that whilst many reports included the adopter experience, there was little evidence of the voice of the child. We conducted a secondary analysis drawing out key themes from the cases and the associated learning. The second phase involved focus groups with three groups of professionals – children’s social workers, foster carer social workers and adoption specialists. We created two vignettes as case studies, based on key characteristics identified in Phase 1. The professionals were asked to discuss the vignettes and identify good practice or possible solutions to the cases presented. These were thematically analysed using the phase 1 framework. The final phase presented the learning to adoption practitioners and adoptive parents (who had adopted during this period and not had a disruption) in separate workshops. They were asked to discuss and co-produce the recommendations with the research team for this report. The findings identified highlight the complexity of the transition and early placement period during the adoption process and mostly focused on failures of communication between the adults involved in the placement of children, the professionals, the adopters and the foster carers. Four key themes were identified, all relating to gaps in knowledge that impacted on the placement: Not Said identifies areas where adopters did not feel able to share concerns or vulnerabilities openly with social workers. This manifested in two ways, first, honesty about feelings, which was when adopters (or sometimes foster carers) had significant concerns about the placement going forward, but did not share this information with professionals. Second, there were incidents of active concealment, when prospective adopters had concealed personal information from the assessing agency that might have been deemed detrimental to their application, and only came to light when the child was in the placement. Not Known covers information that was not available before placement, in terms of the knowledge of the child, and also of adopters not understanding the impact that parenting would have on them. This relates to both information about the child but also the adopters. First there was the adopter reaction to placement where the adopters had an unforeseen or unexpected reaction to the child being placed and the assessment period had not raised any serious concerns about the adopters. And the second aspect related to the understanding of the child and their needs and how the child and their experience was historically and currently understood (or not), with poor or outdated information from assessments and a lack of knowledge about the day-to-day experience of the child. Not Heard considers where information was available, but its significance was not fully understood. This impacted on both social work practice in adopter assessment and on the adopters' expectations of the child in placement. There was professional optimism in the social work practice in the assessment of adopters. There were examples of where social workers had not identified or explored issues that later factored in the disruption. In addition, there was a misalignment in adopter expectations identifying a gap between the adopters’ expectations of adoptive parenting and the reality especially relating to the challenges they faced in parenting traumatised children. Not Challenged explores where there were identifiable issues which were noted or communicated but were not addressed at a point where they could have been managed. There were several communication issues identified including communication breakdowns between foster carers and adopters or between professionals. The reports also evidence where adopters showed an unwillingness to listen to the advice given to them. Finally where there were contrasts in living situations which presented a big adjustment for the child and included differences in parenting styles as well as the material context in which they were now living. Key messages for future practice include the need to centre the child so that their day-to-day experience is captured and understood. Using more curiosity about their current circumstances needs to be applied alongside a diligent analysis of their past experiences and what this might mean for their future selves. Improving communication necessitates the need to invest in all relationships understanding the importance of facilitating connections between professionals and involving foster carers alongside the adopter/child relationship. The UEA Moving to Adoption Model is a valuable framework that assists the building of relationships. The findings suggest there is a need to rethink the ‘who and how’ of support recognising the importance of earlier support during the transition, flexibility in the provision and timing of support, the range of support needed from practical to therapeutic interventions, and identifying a network of people who can provide the support. Finally, in consideration of the production of the disruption reports, the next step is to capture the learning from disruptions more systematically thinking about the formats, how they are used, how the learning is disseminated and what changes as a result of the learning. Headline Recommendations: Recommendation 1: Approach assessments for children as dynamic pieces of work that should be regularly reflected upon and evidenced. Recommendation 2: Approach the assessment of adopters as fluid in which assumptions are regularly tested and evidenced. Recommendation 3: There is a need for more consistent and robust early support through transition and into the placement. Recommendation 4: Support the implementation of best practice guidance on managing transitions using the UEA Moving to Adoption Model. Recommendation 5: Ensure support for adoptive parents when a placement disrupts. Recommendation 6: Give greater consideration and support to the role of the foster carer. Recommendation 7: Social Work England and/or Adoption England to consider how to develop and support the capacity of children’s social workers in adoption work. Recommendation 8: Ensure parity across agencies in terms of availability and access to early assessment and support services. Recommendation 9: Annual thematic overviews such as the example given by East Midlands Adoption Agency should be conducted as a matter of course. Recommendation 10: A national dissemination plan with accountability for embedding learning from the disruption overview reports should be developed by the Department for Education and implemented by Adoption England and the RAAs.
| Item Type: | Book |
|---|---|
| Faculty \ School: | Faculty of Social Sciences > School of Social Work Faculty of Social Sciences |
| UEA Research Groups: | Faculty of Social Sciences > Research Centres > Centre for Research on Children and Families |
| Related URLs: | |
| Depositing User: | LivePure Connector |
| Date Deposited: | 24 Jun 2025 16:30 |
| Last Modified: | 24 Jun 2025 16:30 |
| URI: | https://ueaeprints.uea.ac.uk/id/eprint/99711 |
| DOI: |
Downloads
Downloads per month over past year
Actions (login required)
 |
View Item |