Family being torn apart by granddaughter being adopted

I agree with you entirely shabby. Assuming there are no other "issues" with the grandparents then the little girl's place is with them, her family who love her unconditionally. Imagine growing up and wondering why your grandma and grandad didn't want you? I would fight tooth and nail for my grandchildren. Lets hope that the publicity makes for a change of mind or at the very least a case for reconsideration.

I feel the same as you, gillybob. It's good that the media has highlighted the case, but I do wonder about what other 'issues' there may be that we are not aware of.

Yes that's lovely for the grandparents. I do wonder however, about the little girl herself. Growing up with such increasingly elderly "parents" will set her apart from her peers. When she's 20 her Granddad will be 90. She could end up with very significant caring responsibilities at a very young age. Would a better compromise not be that she is adopted by younger parents but with guaranteed involvement with her grandparents just as other children have?

As far as I am aware there are not any other issues. At the court case in June the grandparents did not have legal representation as they couldn't afford it and they were not eligible for legal aid. However a lawyer has now taken up their case pro bono.

It also seems very strange, and sad, that the child's mother will be 'allowed to see' photos of her daughter but not allowed to have copies...

While I totally agree that that this is a very sad situation, I do wonder what other factors are involved. Certainly the 20 year old having a 90 'father', assuming he's still alive, poses questions in my mind.
I think Jane10's suggestion is a good compromise.

Tragic situation, if the Grandparents are suitable but not allowed just because of age.58 is not exactly ancient.Poor little girl.

Apparently there is a 45 year rule nowadays and there cannot be a gap any bigger than that between the child and adult carer if social services are involved. As one female caller to the radio show I listened to pointed out she had a child late in life aged 48 so that makes the rule seem absurd. It would certainly have meant that my grandparents would have been ruled out of caring for me.

I totally agree with shabby. This makes me so angry! There is no one like like a child's own family to bring that child up. Bloody interfereing busy-bodies.

My granny was made my foster mother when I was a child because my mother was in and out of hospital. It worked very well, and I too remember my social worker fondly. Was the world a kinder place in those days?

jane10 and loopy - ask the child. I'll bet I know what the answer would be.

I wonder why there was a court case in the first place. There must be other issues. When we took over the care of our twin grandchildren we were 60 and 68. The social workers never once asked us our age and were pleased we were taking over the care. Fortunately for us the situation improved and the children were able to return to their parents a year later which could not have happened if the twins had been adopted. Also I don't know where the 45 year age gap came from. I know of several grandparents bringing up children when the gap is much bigger than this. It would rule out a whole army of grandparents.

We never know if there are other factors involved apart from age though. I know someone here who tried to adopt, and she went on to tell everyone they were not allowed to because 'they spoke too many languages' (she spoke Spanis, he Dutch and they spoke English together, and the child would be schooled in French- but this was just a tiny part of the discussion and decision (I know the social workers involved well- although they didn't give me any info, they told me this has little to do with their decision).

This is a public law case. Legal aid is always granted here. It's only in private law where legal aid has been withdrawn. Obviously there are many other reasons. SS cannot make these reasons public to protect the privacy of the child.

jings asking a 2 year old isn't likely to be very useful! This is a really difficult situation. Poor SW will be damned whatever happens. If we're going to be anecdotal (and I don't think that's particularly useful), my very dear Grandad died at the age of 82. I was 12. Gran was in her late 70s. What would have happened to me as a 12 year old if I had been left in their care? Children's home? No thanks!

At aged 58 & 70 the grandparents are not ancient, and it's not as if they are total strangers trying for IVF or adopting random children from abroad, etc. They are the child's grandparents!

At 60 I would be desperate if I weren't allowed to care for my grandchildren, in place of their parents, and they be put out for adoption.

The child would be their grandchild with, it is hoped, other family members around, so not parents as such.

There are many variants on what makes a family.

They're not ancient now but.......! The extended family includes the mother who must have very significant problems indeed. Hard to keep her out. Yes if it was my DGD I'd probably want to keep her but I hope I would coolly assess the situation and look at it from her point of view not just my own. Risks of great distress in years to come. Go ahead find her young parents who will really be able to offer long term care but with access to her original grandparents.

All the reporting that I have read and heard was quite emphatic SineDie that because they were grandparents they were not entitled to legal aid.

The mother will have had legal aid. The father will have had legal aid and the child will be represented by the independent Children's Guardian. All free. SS will have assessed all possible kinship carers to see if they are suitable. There will probably be an assessment by another independent social worker too. If at all possible children will be placed within the extended family. It is only if it is unsafe to do so that that permanency by adoption will be recommended.

And then it is the court which makes the decision, based on all the evidence. Not SS.

It is not a good idea to rely on a biased and partial account from one source. The grandparents will have been assessed if the parents put their names forward. The child's best interests come first, not the desires of grandparents.

It is normal practice for SSD to look to family first; if they have decided against this option, I would be wondering if there are other issues of which we here on this forum cannot be aware.

Not just ageist? I wonder.

It may have nothing to do with their age. It may be that the mother is not safe with the child and the grandparents may be deemed unable or unwilling to prevent contact between the mother and the child.

There are bound to be issues we cannot be aware of, for confidentiality reasons.

The mother may not be permitted to keep photos, as she may put them on social media.

Point is - we don't know, and nor should we. These things are private, complicated and sometimes risky for the child involved.

I think we should know. God knows what would happen if these things went under cover.

If the public are to be told all, what about the child ? do children not have a right to privacy?