Hansard

I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to the amendments in my name, which focus on strengthening adoption support in Scotland and, crucially, on preventing adoption breakdown.Before I turn to the individual amendments, I place on record my thanks to the Scottish Government—particularly the minister—for its constructive and on-going engagement on the amendments, right up to late yesterday, when we were still discussing them. I also acknowledge the work of the cross-party group on social work, which I chair, and through which I have engaged extensively with practitioners, adopters and care-experienced people. That work has been instrumental in shaping the amendments. I also place on record that, as a registered social worker, my experience of working with children, families and adoptive families over a long time has influenced the amendments. Most importantly, I have been contacted directly by constituents in my area and by adoptive families and adopted people across Scotland, who have shared deeply personal experiences of the challenges that they have faced after an adoption order was granted and of the consequences when the right support is not available at the right time. Their voices are at the heart of the amendments.Taken together, the proposals are about ensuring that adoption support is seen as an essential, sustained part of our adoption system.Amendment 11 would add “specialist post-adoption social work” to the list of adoption support services under section 1 of the Adoption and Children (Scotland) Act 2007. Local authorities already have a duty to provide adoption support services but, too often, families report losing access to specialist expertise once the adoption order is granted. There are many reasons for that, including that families themselves may not want social work support.The amendment seeks to ensure that adoptive families are not left without expert, trauma-informed support at the point when challenges may become more, rather than less, complex. One parent who contacted me about the lack of post-adoption social work for their child said:“We adopted him and love him dearly. From a more clinical perspective, adoptive parents save the system a significant amount of money over a child’s lifetime, while also helping to ensure that child grows into an adult who can contribute positively to society and reach their full potential. This brings into sharp focus the lack of meaningful post-adoption support. There are complex neurodiverse needs common among children awaiting adoption. Yet there appears to be a ‘cliff-edge’ approach, where support effectively ends once the adoption paperwork is signed. This must change.”That is a long quote, but I feel that it is powerful.I make it clear that amendment 11 is not about blaming social work adoption services. I have many ex-colleagues who now work in adoption services and I know that their work depends on the priorities in social work and case loads, as Miles Briggs mentioned in relation to a previous amendment. This amendment is about where support for newly adoptive families fits in.Amendment 12 would take a similar approach by adding “peer support” to the list of adoption support services. Evidence from adopters consistently highlights the value of peer support, both before and after adoption, and the distinct needs that arise at different stages of the adoption journey, in particular during the teenage years. This amendment recognises the importance of structured, accessible peer support as part of a comprehensive support offer. We found, through the work of the cross-party group on social work, that a lot of adoptive parents actually found each other after adoption breakdown, through forums or other means, and they felt that it would have been more useful to have such support at an earlier stage.Amendment 13 would require local authorities, when carrying out their duty to provide an adoption service, to have regard to“the desirability of ensuring sustainable funding for adoption support services to prevent adoption breakdown”.The amendment reflects a clear message from both families and professionals that prevention and early support are significantly more effective, and more cost-effective, than responding after a crisis has occurred. Adoption breakdown is traumatic for children and families, and it also places additional pressure on already stretched public services. Sustainable funding is, therefore, the right and prudent approach.In another case in which I have been involved, a parent who feared that they may experience an adoption breakdown said:“We had been in the process of adopting again—something we were so excited about—but we’ve had to stop because we can’t keep everyone safe right now”.They went on to say that“living through this has shown me just how broken the system is for families like ours.”Again, that is a powerful quote for committee members to consider.Amendment 14 would require ministers to make regulations to ensure recognition of“care-experienced status for the purposes of accessing relevant services and support, including … mental health … services.”Although I agree—and I have discussed this with the minister—that not all services that are available to care-experienced people will be relevant to adopted children, it is vital that adopted children’s care-experienced status and their rights to support are properly recognised, and that they get the support that they need.That is particularly important with regard to access to mental health support and fast-track access to child and adolescent mental health services, in line with the commitments set out in “The Promise”. I am sure that other members around the table will have had requests for support from CAMHS for adopted children. Children who have been adopted have often, by the very nature of adoption, had traumatic experiences in their early life similar to those with care experience, and they really need CAMHS support. As such, this amendment could make a real, and very big, change.Amendment 15 would insert a new section into the 2007 act that would require ministers to make regulations setting out“a definition of ‘adoption breakdown’”alongside“guidance … on the collection and sharing of information.At present, the lack of a national definition and consistent data collection makes it extremely difficult to monitor trends, learn from experience or take preventative action. This amendment would bring transparency, learning and improvement to our engagement with adoption breakdown.Amendment 15 is more about being better informed instead of assigning blame, and I want to acknowledge the explicit welcome that The Promise Scotland and Barnardo’s have given it in their stage 2 briefings.Barnardo’s has also supported my final amendment—amendment 16—which would require ministers to produce a report on funding for therapeutic support as part of adoption support services, including consideration of whether Scotland should establish a national therapeutic support fund. The amendment draws on the model of England’s adoption and special guardianship support fund and responds directly to concerns raised by families about unequal access to therapeutic support, depending on where they live. A national approach has the potential to improve consistency, equity and outcomes.These amendments are, as I said at the start of my remarks, grounded in the lived experience of adoptive families, the expertise of social work professionals and the clear message that adoption support must be sustained, specialist and preventative.I move amendment 11.