What we believe in
Position Statement 1: Planning for babies
November 2003
On this page:
1 Introduction
Local authorities and voluntary adoption
agencies, health authorities and other
organizations responsible for assessing and
planning for children under 2 need to ensure
that no child is left in a health and
developmental vacuum where their needs
and timescales become secondary to
resources, bureaucracy or lack of
understanding. Where birth parents or birth
families cannot provide the loving, safe and
secure relationships that infants need, then
permanent family placement must be
planned and provided.
Professional practice in this area is in flux,
with many examples of innovative
approaches but also considerable uncertainty
about the principles of good practice. BAAF
has published a Practice Guide entitled
Right from the Start: Best practice in
adoption planning for babies and other
children (BAAF, 2003) LINK. The Guide is an in
depth exploration of the dilemmas faced by
practitioners in achieving optimal outcomes
in the placement of very young children, sets
out a model of good practice, and provides
practical guidance for workers engaged in
this task. To complement the Practice Guide,
BAAF’s Position Statement on this issue is set
out below.
2 Background
2.1 A number of factors have influenced
BAAF’s conclusion that the issue of
infant placement is one which requires
urgent attention:
2.2 Despite the well established shift in
adoption practice away from babies,
‘relinquishing’ parents and infertile
couples to placement of older children
from the care system, a significant
number of babies and infants require
placement in an adoptive family. A
small number will continue to be
‘relinquished’ infants. A larger number
will be the latest child born to families
who have repeatedly demonstrated
their inability to parent previous
children or who have seriously abused
or neglected previous children. Others
will be born to parents whose drug or
alcohol abusing lifestyle or serious
mental health problems prevent them
from caring for their children.
2.3 Some children become “looked after”
from birth, or soon after, and never
return to the birth family. Despite the
recognition of the need for early
assessment and planning for
permanent placement, there is still
substantial delay in achieving
placement in their new permanent
family. (Ivaldi 1998). In addition
children may experience a number of
placements in the care system during
the period before they join their
permanent family. Each move entails
separation and loss of an important
relationship(s) during a critical
developmental stage for the child.
2.4 Research increasingly emphasises the
significant negative lifelong impact on
children when there is delay in
achieving secure, ongoing relationships
with responsive, nurturing adults.
(Rutter, Quinton and Hill 1990,
Triseliotis 2002) Indeed there is
increasing evidence that the lack of a
stimulating, sensitive and sensual
experiences in the first months and
years of life has a negative impact on
the physical development of the brain
(Cairns, 2002) which can affect the
child’s capacity to develop positive
relationships, learn and become
resilient and adaptive to changing
social circumstances.
2.5 Social workers lack experience in
assessing and planning for babies. The
perception that this is a more
straightforward task than planning for
older children can result in this work
being allocated to workers without the
necessary knowledge, skills or support.
2.6 Problems in court systems and legal
processes that do not work to
children’s timescales. These include
scheduling difficulties, problems in
obtaining CAFCASS and ‘expert’
reports, the need to be human rights
compliant and the adversarial nature
of contested hearings.
3 Dilemmas
Assessment and planning for the appropriate
placement of infants entails a number of
dilemmas, not all of which are easy to
resolve. The child’s short term and long-term
needs are sometimes incompatible, whilst
the needs of the child are often in
opposition to those of birth or adoptive
parents.
3.1 If a baby is placed directly with
adopters (for example, straight from
hospital), this could pressurise a birth
mother who otherwise might
consider keeping her child. Should
‘direct’ placements therefore be
avoided?
3.2 If direct placement is the mother’s
choice, but her family and the birth
father have not been consulted, (e.g.
because the mother will not reveal
their identity) should the placement be
postponed to allow for a court to
adjudicate on the father or birth
family’s right to be informed, and the
possibility of a claim by them to care
for the baby?
3.3 The stress surrounding early placement
in a contested situation may affect the
adopters’ bonding process. Should
placement be postponed until the
legal situation is resolved?
3.4 It may appear that a baby, well settled
and much loved in an ‘unmatched’
temporary foster home, could be
adopted by these carers. This may be a
transracial placement, or the carers
may be older, or they may have limited
understanding of the adoption task.
Should the baby be moved?
3.5 The baby may have siblings who are
already adopted; their family may be
unprepared for a further placement.
Should plans be delayed until this
family have been counselled and
assessed?
3.6 Parental substance misuse or serious
mental illness may affect the baby’s inutero
development and subsequently
its own future health and
development. Should placement be
postponed until some of the
unknowns are clarified?
4 BAAF’s Position
BAAF believes that social work, health and
other organisations as well as individual
practitioners and adult carers of infants have
a prime responsibility to ensure that in all
assessment, planning and decision making,
including the resolution of conflicts, the
child’s needs are paramount. Infants under
2 do not have the emotional, cognitive or
social resources to wait for adults.
To maximise the opportunity presented by
the developmental window of infancy, they
need secure, loving, responsive adults
committed to them throughout their
childhood.
In order to achieve this,
BAAF believes that:
4.1 Adoption planning for babies should
begin at the earliest appropriate stage
and involve staff who are qualified and
experienced in this work.
4.2 Pregnant woman who are considering
placing their babies for adoption must
be offered counselling on request by
workers experienced in both family
support and adoption. This should
include sensitivity and understanding
of the position of ‘unmarried’ women
in different cultures.
4.3 Where it is assessed before birth that it
is unlikely the birth parents will
successfully care for the child or where
relinquishment is planned by the birth
parent, discussions should take place
and, where appropriate, an assessment
should be made before the birth of
the child, to establish the capacity of
other birth relatives or of the adopters
or foster carers of the expected infant’s
siblings, to care for the infant.
4.4 Where an ‘at risk’ baby is under six
months, agency reviewing and
monitoring timescales must be based
on the child’s developmental timescale.
This must include rigorous assessment
of the likelihood of the baby returning
home and support to the birth
parent/s for implementing this return.
4.5Where pre-birth counselling has taken
place and the mother/parents confirm
after the birth their desire for the child
to be placed for adoption, relinquished
new born infants should be placed
with their intended adoptive families
from hospital wherever this is possible.
4.6Repeated attempts at rehabilitation to
the birth family, where rehabilitation
has previously failed and where there
is no evidence of substantial change in
parenting capacity, should not be
undertaken.
4.7 Birth fathers (including those without
parental responsibility) and birth relatives must be included in all
planning at the earliest possible stage,
unless the mother has ‘good reason’
for them not to be consulted.
4.8 Babies should be settled into a
permanent family at the youngest
possible age with the fewest
possible moves. Where such a
placement conflicts with the needs
of adoptive or birth parents the
needs of the child must take
precedence. Adults should be asked
and supported to bear the potential
risks and pain of a change in plan,
circumstance or any developmental
uncertainty in the child so that the
infant’s needs can be met in a
placement that offers stability and
security at a critical stage in its
development.
4.9 Concurrent planning is an effective
way of planning permanence for some
children. Its use by a greater number
of agencies and for a wider group of
children should be encouraged.
Agencies should consider developing
the model to allow concurrent
planning to be used for infants who
are likely to be subject to contested
care proceedings, and for situations
where the high levels of contact
normally expected in concurrent
planning may not be possible.
4.10 The views of current foster carers
should always be elicited on the long
term plan for the child. Interest in
applying to adopt from current carers
should be given careful consideration,
and where appropriate, they should be
assessed on their capacity to meet the
child’s assessed needs in the short and
long term.
4.11 Local authorities must plan to ensure
that foster carers/adopters are
available at short notice for infant
placements which reflect the ethnic
diversity of the local population.
4.12 Delays in the court process, particularly
where babies are in care proceedings,
should be urgently addressed. Local
agreements should be made between
local authorities and courts to clarify
the objectives of early placement
planning with foster/adopters when
care proceedings are in progress.
4.13 Adoption planning for infants should
always consider the child’s need to
know about their genealogical
heritage. This should include
appropriate planning for contact.
4.14 Local authorities should monitor the
number of placements of all infants
under two years and set specific
performance indicators to reduce
moves for these children.
References
Cairns, K (2002) Attachment, Trauma and Resilience:
Therapeutic caring for children, London: BAAF
Ivaldi, G (1998) Children Adopted from Care: An examination
of agency adoptions in England – 1996, London: BAAF
Re J [Adoption: Contacting Father] [2003] 1 FLR 933 and
[2003] EWHC 199
Rutter, M, Quinton, D and Hill, J (1990) ‘Adult outcome of
institution-reared children: males and females compared’, in
Robins, L and Rutter, M (eds) Straight and Devious Pathways
from Childhood to Adulthood, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, pp135-57
Triseliotis, J (2002) ‘Long term fostering or adoption? The
evidence examined’, Child and Family Social Work, 7, pp23-33
| 
