Appendix 6: Online survey results
Summary
We conducted an online survey on topics relating to the Act. It was open between 16 June and 11 July and received 421 responses.
Adoption
109 respondents provided comments on adoption. Half were adoptive parents, with birth parents and professionals each making up a further fifth of responses, and just over 10 per cent of responses coming from people who had been adopted.
The most common suggestion was for more comprehensive and easily accessible post-adoption support, based on periodic assessments of the child’s needs, as well as parity between support for adopters and support for kinship carers
One adoptive parent told us that they would like:
“More post-adoption support which is accessible, less waiting time for support, quicker and easier access to adoption support fund, understanding of effects of adoption and early trauma within the mainstream education settings, support for schools for supporting adopted children… the list is endless!”
They added: “I am shocked at how poor adoption support is.” Another said that they had waited 12 months for funding from the Adoption Support Fund.
A special guardian wrote:
“Special guardianship is not fit for purpose as it stands. Too many families are left struggling with contact arrangements, volatile birth parents, being taken back to court repeatedly to try and overturn the SGO or ask for more contact. Special guardians receive little or no support and are often locked in battle with birth parents for years after the SGO is awarded, leaving special guardians exhausted and traumatised and kinship children without therapy due to ongoing contact and leaving the family little time for family time and to build connections with each other.”
Other common suggestions included:
- Introducing a right to revoke an adoption upon reaching adulthood
- Speeding up the adoption process
- A greater preference for kinship care
- Greater openness, including a presumption in favour of contact
Family justice
245 respondents commented on family justice. 33 had professional involvement in the field, with the remainder having a personal interest.
Many raised the presumption of parental involvement. One respondent told us:
“The domestic abuse act has not done enough to protect children from perpetrators of domestic abuse, after assaulting our son their father still gets access and finding of facts proved he did it and proved he abused me physically, emotionally, psychologically and sexually. Drugs use. It’s contact no matter the cost.”
Another typical response said:
“The current system places women who’ve been abused at further risk of abuse by prioritising contact with both parents, even when the child doesn’t want contact with the abusive parent.” One response also noted a lack of support for male victims of domestic abuse.
Relatedly, the legal aid criteria for domestic abuse cases were criticised. We were told: “Legal aid being available to only one party is entirely contradictory to the ethos of parity and fairness.” Several others shared this view. More broadly, many respondents lamented the lack of legal aid or overly-stringent means tests for it.
Many respondents complained about the duration of proceedings. Most felt that they are too protracted and that this harms both parents and children. One wrote:
“The system needs a complete overall. Cases taking nearly 3 years is unacceptable. This impacts on the whole family and creates further trauma to all parents who are dealing with a horrendous situation both emotionally and financially.”
However, a minority felt that the process moved too quickly to be understood.
Other common comments included:
- Criticisms of CAFCASS as ineffective or unsympathetic
- Differing views on ‘parental alienation’ theory
- A desire for grandparents and other family members to be consulted more
- Concern about unregulated, pseudo-experts being taken too seriously by the court
SEND
153 respondents commented on provision for children with special educational needs and disabilities. Two thirds of these were parents.
Accountability was raised by many. One said: “Currently no one has accountability for EHC plans. They are a legal framework but no one can make anyone do what is listed in them.” Another similarly argued: “EHCPs are not enforced, L.A’s and school are not held accountable for failing to deliver provision.” They added:
“L.A’s use tax payers money to pay for legal representation at tribunal, grossly unfair when parents have to pay out of pocket and there is NO WAY at all of getting money back even when you win and if is proven the L.A was at fault.”
Many also perceived a lack of coherence in the system. One said:
“Education and health are not joined up at all. Despite wanting to, education professionals are not able to work with health colleagues in too many cases due to unavailability to health colleagues to support statutory processes and conflicting KPIs and demands from CCGs. Education and social care can work together but often it is not effective due to social workers’ high caseloads which prevent the levels of engagement needed to actually make a difference.”
Further common themes included:
- Insufficient attention being given to children who do not have an EHCP
- Schools failing to understand children’s needs or take parents’ views into account
- Delays in getting—and insufficient funding for—support
Employment rights
39 answered on employment rights. Three-quarters of these were parents/carers.
On shared parental leave, a couple of respondents gave positive feedback. One wrote:
“From our perspective, shared parental leave has been very successful [ … ] apart from some teething problems whilst our employers adjusted and developed policies, we had no issues. We really valued having this opportunity.”
However, most were critical. Respondents typically argued that it is unaffordable for the higher earner to use it and that mothers losing leave when fathers take it made couples unwilling to use the scheme.
One respondent warned of the scheme’s dangers in abusive relationships: “My abuser ‘used’ all leave - stating shared parental leave (although never actually used it for the children), I then couldn’t claim the leave, so had to either use up holidays or go totally unpaid.”
Other comments related to resistance from employers. One told us: “I was the first male at my employer to use Shared Parental Leave provision when it was introduced in 2017, and frankly it wasn’t taken/treated seriously for a man to do so.”
Several respondents suggested that fathers should be given longer paternity leave on a ‘use it or lose it’ basis.
On flexible working, respondents drew attention to employers’ reluctance to grant requests. One told us: “I was made to feel by my employer that to request flexible working or job share would demonstrate that I was struggling to carry out my role despite being good at what I did & in effect blocked me from promotion.” Another noted that they had observed significant variation in how employers interpret guidance on grounds to deny a request.
Mental health
114 answered the question of how effective support for children’s mental health is.
One told us: “Bad. Lethal. I have a dead child. And 2 legal judgments of systemic failure for the 2 others.” Several others disputed the premise of the question that there was any support at all.
None of the responses were positive. Comments included:
- “Appalling. We’ve been waiting for CAMHS for 9 months so far, and no indication how much longer.”
- “My teenage son attempted suicide THREE times CAHMS did not help”
- “Having had a 7 year old son who was so dysregulated he was trying to throw himself out of windows and grabbing knives, there was no support for him (or us). The GP, after two failed CAMHS referrals as he ‘didn’t meet threshold’ told us ‘if we could at all afford it, even if it means borrowing money’ to find support privately. That CAMHS will not accept a child unless they have made 2 viable attempts on their own life.”
- “It’s non existent apart from in extreme crisis. My son has a brain injury. He was referred in 2020, was rejected by CAHMS and is still on the waiting listed for secondary support services.”
- “The waiting list to access mental health services are too long, often a 2 year wait. If support plans are put in from the beginning both at home and school this would reduce the number of problems with mental health.”
- “Ineffective, inflexible, too little, too late. Adopted children need automatic very early and continuing support, not to be passed from professional to professional and multiple organisations.”
- “Appalling. Two year wait for a CAMHS referral and very little else for children in crisis.”
- “It took 16 months for first consultation by which time my son’s mental health had gotten to drastic level, he barely slept or ate, he’d lost so much weight you could see all his bones. He never left house except for occasionally going up school, he had so many scars from self harming. It was very scary time. I was told that he would be on urgent care list, which meant that he would receive treatment from the same physiatrist each visit and he would be seen twice as many times as others … this simply meant appointments every 4 weeks instead of 8!!!”
- “It is appalling! There is little or no coherent pre-emptive mental health care.”