Family being torn apart by granddaughter being adopted

nina, I know of a few cases where children were brought up by other relatives. It's not of itself illegal - and if there are no problems, and no challenges from the biological parents, and everyone is happy about it, it would not be challenged even today, AFAIK.

I'm wondering if there was anything legal about my sibling born before mum met and married dad being brought up by my mum's parents. I won't go into the reasons. I suspect there wasn't. This would have happened early '50's when she was about 4, when my GP's were in their 50's she lived with them until she married.
With people having children later in life the GP's ages seem insignificant.

Crumbs, having read that - and the fact that mother didn't want her child placed with them speaks volumes - I'm relieved the child has been adopted outside the family.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-33649090 is this story, too.

Guess what, we didn't have the full story....new report (see here, 50 mins in www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b062n4n2) shows that the grandparents' ages were irrelevant. The reason for the grandparents being rejected as adopters was that there was a history of abuse from them to the child's mother, and that the mother did not want these abusive people to have the care of the child.

I had that experience too Iam, although to be honest it only happened when the local authority was encouraging the grandparents to become involved. They are probably less eager to pay in this case since they have made up their minds the grandparents are unsuitable (rightly or wrongly). But it would seem only fair that they should pay this new, altruistic legal representative!

The only thing I feel it's relevant to add to night owl'so accurate representation of the way in which decisions are made in public law is about legal representation of grandparents or other relatives. Me experience was that the children's guardian often asked the court to suggest the local authority pay for independent legal representation for grandparents if they weren't entitled to legal aid.

First of all, there is no 45 year rule. I have assessed many grandparents to care for their grandchildren where there was a much larger age gap than 45 years. Part of the assessment is always to look at contingency plans within the family in case the grandparents can't continue to care for the child until adulthood.

Secondly, yes, this is a public law case but the grandparents are presumably not parties in the proceedings. They will not therefore qualify for legal aid.

Thirdly, there may well be other factors here that we are not aware of that have ruled the grandparents out. Alternatively, it could just be a bad decision. It happens. I'm glad it will be heard by a court, thanks to the solicitor who has agreed to represent them free of charge. I will be interested in the outcome, and hope we get to hear it.

It makes me sad that this child could be denied being brought up by loving Grandparents. I was an orphan ( really don't like that word) just after my 3rd birthday and my 63 year old Granny became my legal guardian, I don't think it ever had to go to court but I was to young to know), I definitely never had a social worker and Granny did a brilliant job all on her own.

Lesser of two evils.

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

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

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.

Not just ageist? I wonder.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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!

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.

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).

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.

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

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?