[lucyjoy]

"I think that birth order and adoption twining is nearly a crime"

That's a really hurtful statement and very unfair. I have 4 kids the same age and their issues, not my inibility to parent that many at a time are what hurts them. While I do advocate that new children should be the youngest, that isn't always possible and I have twice adopted out of birth order. Guess I'm a criminal.

There are not a lot of homes willing to take kids who have one or more disrupted placements and histories that include sex and fire setting. Denying them a family to avoid twinning or birth order seems really pointless.

I do have kids in crisis now but not because I twinned them or adopted them out of birth order. They're in crises because schizephrenia alters the mind. They're in crises because despite cross the country treetment wasn't enough to repair one of the children from the damage done at the hands of his mother and her boyfriend.

So, lock me up for my terrible crime of twinning my kids and adopting out of birth order. I find that statement very insulting.

[HappyMomAnna]

It didn't say it was a crime of the Aparents--or that it was a crime to have someone locked up for Lucy.....

Where I think the NEARLY crime part is that the States are not always willing to look at the situations and how often is it that we find good loving families wanting to adopt the children who are within months of the same age of a biological child in the home.... That is where I personally feel the crime of the state comes into play....Especially with biological and adopted children not even so much in the case of all children being adopted...

Too often here I see so much difficulty with families who adopt the same age as a biological child and are overwhelmed with the issues the adopted child has...I think the states and caseworkers need to understand that for parents it is very difficult to raise two children close in age with such different expereinces....and when you place a child who has a difficult life history with a child who has not then to me there is bound to be issues....

I am sorry that this statement offended you I didn't mean for it to and was thinking more about the placement of a new child in a home where that child is the only one adopted and the other children are stable and secure not in a situation where all of the children have an equal place in the hearts of the adoptive parents... Your situation is very unique and different then a family with several bios taking a first placement within the same age or twining a bio with an adoptee--I am sorry it just is...

Maybe my feelings seem mean but my exoereince and understanding has been that in Oregon they won't even make that sort of placement anymore. Most of our children are placed as only or youngest by routine here because of these issues and while it might not be a crime it sure is a policy... Simply to avoid the disrution and pain that families have when an adoptee harms one of the biological children... But then too also the adopted children because of the wait periods for new placements... When we went to the state Tori was 16 and our worker flat told us he would not have a child any older then 10 placed...

Where the problem is and why I feel it is a crime is that good intending families want and are able to offer a home to one more child and have a situation for problems set up by poor consideration with caseworkers... Other families with experience in adoption with no biological children to protect have the ability to make these choices--it is a new family (and part of what this thread is supposed to be directed toward) that might not be able to consider the implications of what having a 6 year old girl who was sexually abused might do to their 5 year old biological son...
That was the point of my statement...

[Colorbind love]

Well, Anna, you will have just condemned a great many children to suffer without permenant families with that policy. The simple fact is that its usually experienced families with children in the home who have the experience, desire and ability to parent these children. And, that often means the possibility of disrupting birth order or artificially twinning.

We did disrupt birth order. I don't think it was the wrong decision. In fact, I think it was brillant for this child. He needed to be entrusted and established as oldest. He needed the safety that regressing still meant he was the big boy because he can't possibly regress far enough to be less than his little siblings. He can wear pull-ups at night when the nightmares get bad and he doesn't feel bad--because EVERYONE wears pull-ups in this house. No one is dry at night, so its not a big deal that he isn't. No one sleeps by themselves, so its no big deal if he needs someone to cuddle with in order to sleep. Its not big deal that he needs a nightlight because everyone needs one. Its no big deal if he needs to climb onto mommy's lap and get cuddles because everyone does. He is still a big kid, because he is still bigger than all of his siblings. And, his self esteem has rocketed since being a big brother. The adoration and admiration of 3 little ones has shown him that he really is strong and brave and worthy of a great deal.

And, what I didn't know when we adopted him was that God gave him back exactly what was taken from him--a brother and 2 sisters. They will never replace the 3 he lost. But, their precense has helped him find healing in his life.

Sure, he's not from the foster care system. Sure, his issues don't actually make him a threat to other children in the home. But, if you insisted on not disrupting birth order or artificially twinning, you would have denied homes to about 90% of the children who have come from his country into the US because they were all integrated into existing families. No one else was willing to take on the challenges of these scared and hurting children except established parents. Approximately 150 children have been adopted from his country since 1996. Less than 10% have disrupted. That's pretty darn good stats for children with PTSD and other issues from having experienced and survived such a horrific war.

I don't think the decision to place these children was criminal at all. I think it was a recognition that children need families, even if that means defying the perfect ideas about what family they should have. I think families need to be adequately prepared and to walk into such situations with their eyes wide open and fully informed of the needs and issues of the children they are adopting. But, I don't think they should be barred automatically because of the precense of other children. That is as blindsighted as when people say you shouldn't adopt waiting children. Its blind sighted because it completely disregards the dynamics of an individual child and family. That doesn't find children homes, it just perpetuates the myths of all that is wrong with older waiting children.

[kamamsm]

We twined- It worked for us. It may not work for everyone- but it wasn't a problem here.

[crick]

I can see points from both sides. I don't think it's criminal or impossible to work when a child is placed with existing siblings or out of birth order. Anna, I get what you mean by "nearly criminal" but feel that it wasn't the best choice of words.

I also believe there are a lot of kids who should be the youngest child in the home or the only child. How many times have we suggested this to prospective adoptive parents just starting the process? More often than not, many of us will recommend they don't adopt a child older than their current children in the home.
Or we suggest a potential match might not be the best fit because the child appears to have too many issues and would not thrive with other children around. Or be a potential danger to the other children. (And I don't think this "perpetuates the myth all that is wrong with older children" because let's face it there are going to be older children who just have too much hurt and trauma to place safely with other kids. Not all, but surely some)

And then, there are families where it doesn't matter as much what the birth order is etc. and works just fine. Like others have posted here, there are times when a child will thrive more being the oldest or with another sibling close in age. It all comes down to the families, their experience and desire, the individual child and the history, trauma, of the child, and the best interest of both the family & child.

As with anything else we educate ourselves on, it's yet another issue to consider and have all the information we can before making our decisions. And just like anything else we learn here, we see there are issues we ourselves couldn't handle but others can and do.

Crick

[Happy]

Twinning and birth order are debates that have and will rage on. Fact is, we need to adopt specific children into specific families. For some that means sticking to birth order and no twinning. For others just the opposite. We adopted out of order and twinned simultaneously. It has worked great for us. We've also recently adopted a much younger. This is working, too. What has made them both work has nothing to do with birth order or age, but everything to do with having a fantastic social worker looking out for our family, educating ourselves as to the issues involved in special needs adoptions, and being very, very clear about what we will and will not accept as far as issues with the children we adopt. Even going so far as walking away from a placement when we felt the child's worker wasn't being totally straight with us. As we advocate for special needs adoption, lets be careful to remember that these children are as different from each other as our families are different. There is no one-size-fits-all plan for special needs adoption. If there are any rules they should be to go in with your eyes wide open, a drive to learn everything you can, and lots of support. You'll find a good chunk of that last bit here.

[HappyMomAnna]

well, I do admit the choice of words was a big mistake...

And...yes this is a debate that will go on for a long time... I just feel my state has made a good choice and that there have been fewer disrutpions due to this policy. I don't feel it is wrong for every family--I feel that first time adoption families from the system may not have any idea what they are getting into...

[jojobear]

i can tell you that my little one does not do well with older kids or kids his age. He does okay with kids littler or younger than him. But at 28 months we are having a lot of issues with aggressiveness towards other children, funny thing is his birth order in his bio family, he is the baby and has all older sibs.

Jody

[mommom]

It is so wonderful to be able to relate to all you - thanks. Two things I have done (after having the police show up on my doorstep on more than one occassion during a rage), is that when an episode begins and I think it is gonna be a biggie (I can kinda tell by a look they get in their eyes) I call the police station and tell them - then if they get a call from a concerned neighbor they already know everything is okay - has really helped out in that area.

I remember a couple of years ago I had a 6yo boy who was a screamer One of the first time the PD showed up). One afternoon he and his brother were playing in the front and pulling weeds. We had made it a contest. He didn't want to pull weeds but he wanted to be paid the quarter for pulling the most. Told him thatis not how it works. He sat down and started screaming. We just went about our business - neighbors were peeking out doors and windows - walking/driving by to see what was up - there he sat ion the middle of the yard just screaming at the top of his lungs - police never came back (well, at least not for that kid). Sometimes I want to just get a big neon sign for the roof that flashes "TANTRUM IN PROGRESS".

The other thing was on Halloween we went to every door on the block (or at least within 'raging' hearing distance) and let the neighbors see who we were. there aren't that many kids in the neighborhood and it was kinda cool because one of the neighbors 'wasn't ready' for halloween and a couple dayss later she brought over a bag of animal crackers - for which all the kids wrote thank you notes.

[dadfor2]

i put this thread here for new parents looking into adopting a special needs child.

some parents go into adoption to become first time parents with dreams like every other family

some parents go into adopotion because they already have a birth child and want to adopt another child for their birth child to have a 'playmate' and they want to expand their familes.

some people adopt because they want to be parents again and their birth children grew up and out of the house and miss the pitter patter of feet across the kitchen floor

some people adopt because they want to help a child out of the foster care system.

some people adopt because they love children so much and there lives feel empty without them.

some people adopt because they cant have children of their own...

some people adopt because...blah blah blah

there are many reasons why people go into adoption. there is no right or wrong reasons to adopt a child.

but a few things we have learned through the years about adoption.

we have learned that having open adoptions actually can work

we have learned that with alot of kids in the foster care system, they could have some sort of attachment issues

we have learned that with alot of these kids in the system maybe need to be babied again

we have learned that with alot of these kids traditional parenting doesnt work.

we have learned that maybe its not in the best interest to keep some siblings together

we have learned that alot of these kids do better with being the youngest

we have learned that alot of these kids do better being an only child.

we have learned alot, and im sure that we will learn more as the years go on because the children will continue to teach us.

everyone experiences are going to be different, i dont think that its a 'for everyone' guide line.

these children are so different, just like us. they are all individuals with different ways they handle things and internalize things.

but yes, we have learned things.

what works:
most families have a baby, the baby gets older and then mom gets pregnant again and the attention goes to the babie, but the older child might get resentful or angry, but is already attached to the parents so they will be angry, then grieve not being the baby, and then gradually accept that he/she is the oldest and move on.

most birth familys go in birth order. unless they are twins, and that lends to something else.

adoption, yes, sometimes is out of birth order. but we have learned that most of the time it is better to have the older child first then the younger.

the older child might need re-parenting, might need to be babied a little bit and build a strong attachment before the younger one comes because all the attention will go to the younger.

if you have a younger one, and your doing the babing stuff with the younger one and the older one comes...its hard to start seperate and do the babying stuff just due to age, and the younger one still needs to be babied too

do you go to the screaming baby, or do you go to the older child screaming...most go to the younger one...because the older one, is just older....even though you know they are younger emotionally, when they are screaming for you, you tend to go to the younger.

i think annas point should not be disregarded. this is what we have learned.

then there are other cases were adoption twinning has worked out fine.

alot depends on the kids, alot depends with why the 'new' parents are going into adoption.

we have some sort of knowledge, or if you will, some sort of guideline, but it doesnt mean you cant color outside the lines now and then.

these guidlines that are put in place, are to help families and help children. yes, you dont have to stay inside the lines, but they are there for the obvious reasons.

this post was for new adoptive parents looking into adopting a special needs child..not even so much for a waiting child, but a special needs child.

it was put here to open up some eyes and for us to educate these families.

so, i do agree with anna, and yes, in most situations, it is best to have the new adopted child as the youngest child in the home.

this is in most cases, not all cases.

havnt we all learned this already?

in regards to disruption. I dont think for a minute that people disrupt because it just 'didnt work out'

people disrupt because the child in the house was unsafe, the other children were at risk, or their behaviors just couldnt be controlled at all......

i dont think people go into adoption totally blind. they have some sort of an idea on what this is about. at least here in mass.

disruption is like losing a child. its hard.

no one just says "oh well, he isnt like bobby or sue, so hes got to go"......

parents try their best, they hold on the best they could, but then the reality hits that they just cant keep the child safe...

i know no one wants to see an adoption disrupt. but i dont think its as easy as people might think it is.

these families consider these children their own. its a heart wrenching experience. even the family that is disrupting doesnt want the disruption but are left with no rescourses and no one to help them.

they become so isolated and the child starts winning the battles because these parents just cant win anymore...they start to slowly give up and the child gets reinforced so the childs behaviors just gets worse...

we are not just talking about a children who tantrum for 6 hours, we are talking about children who kick and hit their parents constantly, we are talking about children who destroy property, break windows, who run away in the middle of an amusement park because it was almost time to go and took hours to find them, its children who secretly start fires, who hit and kick the younger kids in the house...i could go on and on...

but this is some of the reasons why people disrupt, its not from the lack of love

some of these kids dont show their true selves until they get into a 'forever family' due to attachment issues. you cant always blame the foster families (in my case i can) or the cw.

you never know how a child is going to react to another transition. you just never know

its no ones fault.

this thread was made more for people to really think about what they might be getting themselves into and if they are ready to adopt a special needs child.

yes, this list was very exggaerated, some kids dont have all these issues at once.

but it is more of a guideline to adopt a special needs child.

there are alot of kids who are waiting that dont even come close to what some of our special needs kids have.

and when parents come out here saying "im looking too adopt a child with RAD, but i dont want a child that kill pets or have major behavarol problems, but we fell in love with this child with RAD"

do we just sit back and say good luck..no, we try to educate, because it is not about falling in love with these children. We say, maybe this child might not be a good fit in your home

chances are this family is getting in way over their head and yes, a good chance that they will be disrupting within a year.

so, to have a chance about making an adoption work, there are some guidelines, and anna pointed out one of the guidelines.

yes, its not true in all cases...but in most, yes, this is what new parents should be looking at.

dadfor2

[SageKitty]

This thread is very beneficial since we all bring different items to it. I am glad Dad started it. I just think we want a child so bad for whatever reason that we do not always see or ask the right questions.

When I was handed my "disclosure" paperwork there was very little information about the birth family "RED FLAG". You need to know more to help your child. I was given a list of numbers to call. His therapist said he was doing so great that he really had no idea why he was even in therapy. Another RED FLAG.

The Foster family told me that he was doing great, but what they neglected to tell me was they kept him bust 24/7 to keep him out of trouble. He had a ton of daily chores to do and I just thought they were being too strict. They had him picking up acorns just to keep him busy! Another RED FLAG.

I was just naive and had no idea what to ask for or what signs to look for indicating there could be more to this child than meets the eye. He was in my home two weeks when the first RAGE came. It had happened before, but since it had not happened in a year his SW did not tell me this could happen and it was NOT in the disclosure paperwork.

When he tried to hurt my cat and I asked him why he said "Because his Daddy used to do it". I had no idea if this was even true until I asked the SW and she said it was. His Dad hurt and killed animals. Well, I have just about a small petting zoo at my house and I would NEVER have taken this child if I had all of the information. So please, ask and ask for more. This child was adorable with his wonderful blue eyes. I feel in love at first site and maybe that clouded my judgement. After all, why would such an adorable child try to hurt me and the animals and try and jump out the window?

Sagekitty

[Lorraine123]

You want to hear a really crazy story about disclosure - We were told that her records could not be disclosed to us because we weren't her parents. The records were confidential. And since we were officially foster parents prior to finalization, we didn't have access. Now that we have finalized, we can ask for her records to be disclosed (which we have, but we still haven't received them). But - isn't that twisted?????

[dadfor2]

lorraine,

yes it is twisted, and i think that somehow needs to be changed.

we stumbled on our childs records by mistake when the lawyer left it by accident at our house.

we saw things in there that explained some of the fears my children have which we had no knowledge of.

for instance, my older son was petrified to go in the bathroom by himself....why?...we chalked it up as one of his many fears...but when reading the record i found out that birht mom would try to drown him when giving him a bath....

i think if we knew this, we would of handled it differently, myabe, who knows, but it would of put a different spin on things.

plus, the paper work we did get, was wrong too. when matching it with the paperwork found in the file

the paperwork we original got, stated my son was a year older then he actually was.....because someone by accident wrote the wrong year down......

so he was deemed develpmentally behind....the one who caught it was his foster mom.....

if she didnt catch it, or just let it go, then who knows when it would of been catched...

yes lorraine, i think its wrong to not release the records to the parents....our kids when they get older, should know exactly what happened to them. i will keep their paperwork in a safe spot, so when they get much older ill have their records for them

that i think is a crime!!!

dadfor2

[bostonbeagle]

Im still reading this thread, it is quite wonderful! Thanks Dad and everyone for putting and input into it for the experienced and beginner parent like me! My interview is a week away! Right now Im confused, anxious, worried, and excited, and curious!

I have been reading and reading and jotting down questions and so forth!
Well my thoughts for the nite!
Regards,
Boston

[Peggy]

The cats in my house were blamed for everything. I should be on TV with all of the tricks he claimed THEY did. The best one was one of the cats must have hidden the matches behind the cat box. Note: NEVER leave matches anywhere in the house or they will find them.

I thought I was the only one with super cats!