Why does the government add red-tape for self-employed people who adopt children?

When I adopted a child in February 2020, I was lucky enough to be in full-time employment, so I was entitled to the same support for leave and pay as those having birth children.

As you might have guessed from the date, that was really the only lucky thing about my situation. My learning to parent a traumatised toddler coincided with one of the worst public health crises in world history. But at least – as I tried to guide us through some genuinely appalling first days and weeks – I didn’t have to worry about paying the bills.

For self-employed adopters this level of security isn’t guaranteed. They are left to negotiate means-tested local authority funds that may or may not regard them deserving of support. The government seems to think that’s good enough. In the past year it has shrugged off both a petition – which will be debated in the House of Commons tonight – and a report that recommended extending the support to all.

Its stock response: “The government has focused on supporting employed adopters as they do not generally have the same level of flexibility over their work as self-employed adopters do.”

They are missing the point, and in doing so revealing their lack of understanding of adoption issues. The ability for a primary carer to take significant time off after an adoption is vital for the outcome of that adoption – and most families can’t afford to do this on one salary.

These days people generally do not give up babies at birth. They are more likely to be removed by state actors because they are at risk of serious harm. When this happens the best outcome for them is to find a new family rather than grow up in long-term care or an institution. Not only is growing up without a family a bleak prospect for any child, it is also a vast burden on the state. A child in care will cost the government around £56,000 a year. Children over the age of three will struggle to find adopters: each that doesn’t will cost £860,000 in state support to adulthood.

But while adoption can be the best answer to a difficult question, it’s never easy. When children are abused or neglected enough for the state to intervene, these are not children who fit seamlessly into a family – certainly not soon enough to be passed off to full-time childcare anytime soon. It takes months for bonds to be made; for trauma wounds to heal. The first weeks and months of an adoption are stressful, even without a global pandemic.

At the same time – with the rise in instances of successful IVF and issues around Covid – there has been a chronic drop in the number of adopters. The Consortium for Voluntary Adoption Agencies says there’s been a “sharp decrease in adoption orders”, while average waiting times for children looking for adopters has gone up steadily since 2017.

To keep up to speed with all the latest opinions and comment sign up to our free weekly Voices newsletter by clicking here

Yet the government is unwilling to be fair to those that do come forward. When I wrote to my MP, Julian Smith, about this issue, he said the government had made progress on adoption “since 2010” and reminded me, “In 2015, the Adoption Support Fund was introduced, which included £177 million to deliver support… to 62,000 families.”

This might sound like a lot, but between 62,000 that’s £2,855 of one-off support for each adoptive family – many of whom are welcoming traumatised children. Compare that to £860,000 to keep a child in care.

This seems to be very short-sighted. Does the government really want to make any part of the adoption process more difficult and stressful for those (a) giving children a better life, and (b) removing them from reliance on the state?

By forcing self-employed adopters to apply for means-tested support in their local authority, the government is adding more red tape to an already hugely stressful process.

I don’t believe the government should or can afford to discriminate.