Report of the departmental committee on the adoption of children.

  • Great Britain. Home Office. Committee on the adoption of children.
Date:
1954
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Report of the departmental committee on the adoption of children. Source: Wellcome Collection.

    18/96 page 12
    44. We have also been given examples of cases in which an ostensibly “direct” placing has been made by the mother. That is to say, she has placed the child with someone who is a friend of a friend of hers and to whom she was introduced merely for the purpose of handing over the child. In such circumstances the third party does not usually admit that he has taken part in the arrangements, or, no doubt through ignorance, does not notify the placing to the local authority as required by section 31 of the Act. Some of these direct or semi-direct placements are wholly unsuitable, and their prohibition has been urged upon us by many witnesses ; others have advocated granting a power of veto to the local authority if, after notification, the home does not come up to their standard. It was generally agreed that, if evasion were to be prevented, such a power of veto would have to cover all placings with persons other than relatives, even where adoption was not contemplated. While we have great respect for the motives under- lying such proposals, we doubt whether their advocates appreciate either the complexity of the problem or the extent of the interference with individual liberty which their suggestions would entail. 45. We have had to bear in mind that over the whole country only about one quarter of the adoption orders made are in respect of adoptions arranged by societies or local authorities. We regret that no exact statistics are available, but even after allowing for those cases where the child is adopted by a father, mother or a relative there is no doubt that more than one-third of the adoption orders made annually are in respect of children placed outside their own families either direct or by third parties. While this large figure includes the kind of placing which is to be deprecated, it includes also many personal arrangements prompted by neighbourly goodwill and often by genuine affection for the child and his family. Again no exact information is available, but courts are familiar with applicants who are friends of the mother, fellow-workers or landladies who have developed an affection for a child entrusted to their care. Such people, although their income may be small and their housing conditions cramped. are prompted by the highest motives and are prepared to accept the child as he is and incorporate him into their family although they would never have set out to seek a child for adoption in the ordinary way. Again, some adopters have set their heart on a particular child, rather than on a child selected for them by others, however competent. The reasons for their choice may defy analysis, but nevertheless seem to them compelling and may cause them to accept the child more completely “for better, for worse ”’, just because he is their own choice. 46. In the present state of our knowledge it would not be right to fetter all this goodwill. No careful research into the comparative results of adoptions carried out through the agency of adoption societies, local authori- ties or third parties or arranged direct has, so far as we know, been undertaken and, in the absence of reliable data, no conclusion as to the relative value of these methods can be drawn. We believe that any restrictions on third party and direct placings could and would be evaded and that such placings would continue but adoption orders would not be applied for in those cases. Prohibition of such placings would increase de facto adoptions. 47. For all these reasons we do not think it wise or practicable to prohibit either direct or third party placings. 48. We think, however, that third parties should accept responsibility for their actions. We accordingly recommend that all third parties be made respondents to the application. They will then be served with notice of
    digitised image 1
    digitised image 2
    digitised image 3